2013 (12) TMI 988

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t. 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 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nda, J. Shri Piyush Kumar, Advocate, for the Appellant. Ms. Renu Jagdev, SDR, for the Respondent. ORDER Learned Counsel Shri Piyush Kumar submits that the appellant had no knowledge about veracity of the certificate submitted by G Card applicant who came to the employment of the appellant w.e.f. 19-5-2006. He has not only served this appellant but also served many others and left .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 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 Regulati .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X