Customs broker license revoked for illegal transfer and fraudulent export transactions under CBLR 2018

CESTAT New Delhi upheld revocation of customs broker license, forfeiture of security deposit, and penalty imposition. The appellant illegally transferred license to another party for fraudulent export transactions violating CBLR 2018 regulations. Multiple violations established including unauthorized representation, signing blank documents, failure to verify client credentials, and not reporting non-compliance to authorities. The broker's absence during proceedings and inability to refute evidence against him supported the adjudicating authority's findings. Appeal dismissed with all sanctions sustained.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Contravention of various provisions under Custom Broker Licensing Regulation (CBLR), 2018.
2. Revocation of Custom Broker (CB) license and forfeiture of security deposit.
3. Allegations of fraudulent export and availing undue drawback.
4. Procedural lapses and evidentiary issues raised by the appellant.
5. Timeliness and validity of the order under challenge.

Summary:

1. Contravention of Provisions under CBLR, 2018:
The appellant was accused of violating several regulations under CBLR, 2018, including Regulations 1(4), 10(a), 10(b), 10(d), 10(k), 10(n), and 13(12). The Customs Broker (CB) was alleged to have facilitated fraudulent exports by allowing their license to be used by others, failing to verify the authenticity of the exporter, and not maintaining proper records.

2. Revocation of CB License and Forfeiture of Security Deposit:
The order in original confirmed the proposal to revoke the CB license of the appellant and forfeit the security deposit. The Tribunal upheld this decision, citing the appellant's failure to refute the evidence against them or to cross-examine the witnesses who deposed about the fraudulent use of their license.

3. Allegations of Fraudulent Export and Availing Undue Drawback:
The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) intercepted consignments of inferior quality garments being exported at highly inflated values to avail undue drawback. The mastermind behind the scheme, Sumit Agarwal, used fake documents to obtain an Importer Exporter Code (IEC) for a non-existent firm, M/s. Linwood Sales Pvt. Ltd. The appellant's G Card holder admitted to signing blank annexures of the shipping bills and handing them over to Souvik Guha Sarkar, who was involved in the fraudulent transactions.

4. Procedural Lapses and Evidentiary Issues Raised by the Appellant:
The appellant argued that the statement of Chander Sekhar Hore was not made a relied upon document (RUD) to the Show Cause Notice (SCN) and that they were not provided a copy of the same. They also contended that they were not aware of the fraudulent activities and did not receive any consideration for the alleged overvaluation. However, the Tribunal found these arguments unconvincing, noting the appellant's failure to produce evidence or authorization letters and their absence during the inquiry.

5. Timeliness and Validity of the Order Under Challenge:
The appellant challenged the order on the grounds of being barred by time. However, the Tribunal emphasized that fraud vitiates everything and upheld the order, drawing support from previous decisions that highlighted the significant responsibility of a Custom Broker in ensuring compliance with customs regulations.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, confirming the revocation of the CB license and forfeiture of the security deposit. The decision was based on the appellant's failure to adhere to the regulations, involvement in facilitating fraudulent exports, and inability to refute the evidence against them. The Tribunal underscored the importance of the Custom Broker's role in safeguarding the interests of both the importers/exporters and the customs department.

---