Customs Broker License Revocation Overturned by Tribunal due to Incorrect Grounds

The Tribunal set aside the Commissioner's order revoking the Customs Broker License of Maj Shipping Pvt. Ltd. The Tribunal held that the revocation was based on incorrect grounds beyond the scope of the inquiry report. It was found that the appellant had complied with the verification requirements under Regulation 10(n) of CBLR, 2018, and physical verification was not mandatory. As a result, the appeal was allowed, and the order dated 16.08.2022 was overturned.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Revocation of Customs Broker License.
2. Compliance with Regulation 10(n) of CBLR, 2018.
3. Requirement of physical verification of the principal place of business.
4. Validity of the inquiry report and the Commissioner's order.

Summary:

Issue 1: Revocation of Customs Broker License
The appellant, Maj Shipping Pvt. Ltd., appealed against the order dated 16.08.2022 by the Commissioner of Customs (Airport & General), which revoked their Customs Broker License, forfeited the security deposit, and imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000/-. The license was valid until 14.10.2025. The revocation was based on the alleged submission of fraudulent shipping bills by M/s Krishna International to claim IGST refund and drawback benefits.

Issue 2: Compliance with Regulation 10(n) of CBLR, 2018
A show cause notice dated 21.02.2022 alleged that the appellant failed to verify the address given on IEC and GSTIN, violating Regulation 10(n) of CBLR, 2018, resulting in a loss to government revenue. The inquiry report dated 20.05.2022 concluded that the Customs Broker had not matched the addresses and had not physically verified the principal place of business of the exporter.

Issue 3: Requirement of Physical Verification of Principal Place of Business
The appellant contended that there is no requirement under CBLR 2018 for physical verification of the business place of the exporter, supported by previous judgments. The Tribunal affirmed that Regulation 10(n) does not mandate physical verification, and the Customs Broker is only required to verify the correctness of documents using reliable sources.

Issue 4: Validity of the Inquiry Report and the Commissioner's Order
The Commissioner's order was based on the appellant providing only one document out of the two required as per the Circular dated 08.04.2010, which was not the issue raised in the inquiry report. The Tribunal found that the Commissioner should have confined himself to the issues in the inquiry report, which were about address verification and physical verification of the business place. The Tribunal also noted that the appellant had submitted both PAN and Aadhar cards, which should suffice for verification purposes.

Judgment:
The Tribunal held that the Commissioner's order went beyond the scope of the inquiry report and was based on an incorrect ground. The Tribunal also found that the appellant had complied with the verification requirements under Regulation 10(n) and that physical verification was not mandated. Consequently, the order dated 16.08.2022 was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.

---