https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781574 Penalty under Section 114(iii) of the Customs Act, 1962 was considered in the context of a Customs House Agent's alleged failure to obtain exporter authorisation and verify shipping bill particulars. The stated reasoning is that no specific lapse by the agent was proved, the goods had been examined by Customs before export, no independent defect in the shipping bills was established, and no prescribed authorisation proforma existed at the relevant time. The exporter's signature on the shipping bills was treated as sufficient compliance. On that basis, the penalty was described as unsustainable where there was substantial compliance and no proved active facilitation of the contravention. en-us Fri, 14 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Nov 2025 08:42:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781574 Penalty under Section 114(iii) of the Customs Act, 1962 was considered in the context of a Customs House Agent's alleged failure to obtain exporter authorisation and verify shipping bill particulars. The stated reasoning is that no specific lapse by the agent was proved, the goods had been examined by Customs before export, no independent defect in the shipping bills was established, and no prescribed authorisation proforma existed at the relevant time. The exporter's signature on the shipping bills was treated as sufficient compliance. On that basis, the penalty was described as unsustainable where there was substantial compliance and no proved active facilitation of the contravention. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 14 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781574