Customs broker licence suspension is a regulatory measure, not a penalty; Regulation 10(n) needs reliable document-based verification.

Suspension of a Customs Broker's licence under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 was treated as an interim regulatory safeguard pending inquiry, not as a penalty, because the penal framework separately provides for monetary sanctions and does not list suspension as punishment. Regulation 10(n) was read as requiring verification of client particulars through reliable, independent and authentic documents, data or information, but not mandatory physical verification in every case; reliance on official records such as IEC and GSTIN was insufficient by itself to establish breach on the reasoning adopted below. The Tribunal's order was set aside and the broker's challenge succeeded.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether suspension of a Customs Broker's licence could be treated as a penalty under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018. (ii) Whether a violation of Regulation 10(n) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 could be sustained without proof of failure to verify using reliable, independent and authentic documents, data or information.

Issue (i): Whether suspension of a Customs Broker's licence could be treated as a penalty under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018.

Analysis: Suspension of a licence is a regulatory measure available as an immediate intervention pending inquiry and investigation. The penalty provision under the regulations separately specifies monetary penalties, and suspension is not enumerated as a punishment within that penal framework. Treating suspension as a penalty would convert an interim protective measure into an indefinite sanction.

Conclusion: Suspension of the licence could not be sustained as a penalty and the finding to that extent was unsustainable.

Issue (ii): Whether a violation of Regulation 10(n) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 could be sustained without proof of failure to verify using reliable, independent and authentic documents, data or information.

Analysis: Regulation 10(n) requires verification of IEC, GSTIN, identity of the client and functioning at the declared address by using reliable, independent and authentic documents, data or information. The obligation does not mandate physical verification in every case. Where the Customs Broker has relied on official and authentic records such as IEC and GSTIN, non-compliance cannot be inferred merely because the exporter later turns out to be suspect.

Conclusion: The alleged breach of Regulation 10(n) was not made out on the reasoning adopted by the Tribunal.

Final Conclusion: The order of the Tribunal was set aside and the appeal was allowed in favour of the Customs Broker.

Ratio Decidendi: Under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, suspension is an interim regulatory measure under the suspension power and not a penalty, and Regulation 10(n) is satisfied when the broker verifies client particulars through reliable, independent and authentic documents without any mandatory requirement of physical verification.

---