Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2013 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (11) TMI 34 - AT - CustomsRevocation of CHA Licence - Forfeiture of the security deposit - failure to comply with the provisions of CHALR, 2004 - Export of restricted item - Appellant contends that his signature were forged on shipping bills - Held that:- the appellant had knowledge of the forging of the documents and deliberately suppressed the fact to the customs authorities - appellant gave signed blank forms to their Tuticorin Branch without knowing the importer or exporter which would show that the Manager of the CHA of Tuticorin acted under the instruction of the Chennai office. Thus, the CHA firm is responsible for the forgery of documents by their employee. There is gross violation of Regulation 13(a), 13(d), 19(8) and 19(10) of CHALR, 2004 - Following decision of Commissioner of Customs Vs. Worldwide Cargo Movers [2006 (11) TMI 281 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT], Commissioner of Customs Vs. H.B. Cargo Services [2011 (3) TMI 816 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] and Sri Kamakshi Agency Vs. Commissioner of Customs [2000 (11) TMI 144 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS] - Decided against CHA.
|