<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Customs Broker License Revoked for Inadequate Supervision and Regulation Violations; Penalties Imposed.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=75654</link>
    <description>Revocation of Customs Broker License - forfeiture of security deposit - levy of penalty - The CESTAT held that the appellant was responsible for the actions of their employee, as per Regulation 13(12) of the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2018. Despite the appellant&#039;s claim of ignorance, the CESTAT found that they failed to exercise proper supervision over their employees and were therefore liable for the violations. - The Tribunal found that the appellant had violated several regulations, including failing to advise the client to comply with regulations, exercising due diligence, and verifying the correctness of import-export codes. The court upheld the decision of the Commissioner to revoke the appellant&#039;s license and impose penalties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Mar 2024 11:37:09 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Mar 2024 11:37:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=746792" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Customs Broker License Revoked for Inadequate Supervision and Regulation Violations; Penalties Imposed.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=75654</link>
      <description>Revocation of Customs Broker License - forfeiture of security deposit - levy of penalty - The CESTAT held that the appellant was responsible for the actions of their employee, as per Regulation 13(12) of the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2018. Despite the appellant&#039;s claim of ignorance, the CESTAT found that they failed to exercise proper supervision over their employees and were therefore liable for the violations. - The Tribunal found that the appellant had violated several regulations, including failing to advise the client to comply with regulations, exercising due diligence, and verifying the correctness of import-export codes. The court upheld the decision of the Commissioner to revoke the appellant&#039;s license and impose penalties.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Mar 2024 11:37:09 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=75654</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>