Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2013 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (12) TMI 988 - CESTAT NEW DELHIImposition of penalty - Knowledge about veracity of the certificate submitted by ‘G’ Card applicant - Held that:- appellant was penalised without bringing out his active involvement contributing to the questionable educational qualification of ‘G’ Card applicant. There is no circumstance brought out by the impugned order nor any cogent evidence exists to suggest that the appellant had active involvement in the allegation of no genuine certificate produced by ‘G’ Card applicant. No mala fide of the appellant has been brought to record in clear terms. Furthermore, the proceedings has been based on foundation of Rule 19(8) of Customs House Agent Licensing Regulations, 2004 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Regulations’). Reading of Regulation 19(8) shows that supervision of CHA is necessity of law to ensure proper conduct of any of the employee involved in transaction of business as agent. This sub-rule is based on the principle that agent binds his principal for all acts done by agent if those are within the knowledge of the principal. It is also prescription of sub-rule (8) that mis-conduct of the employee should have direct nexus to the transaction of business. The sub-rule operates on a different field for which show cause notice appears to be mis-conceived for which order passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) is set aside - Decided in favour of Appellant.
|