Customs broker's license revocation and penalty deemed disproportionate; license can be restored with new deposit under Regulation 10(n).

The CESTAT Mumbai addressed the revocation of a customs broker license and security deposit forfeiture under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018. The Tribunal found the customs broker breached Regulation 10(n) by failing to verify client details but did not breach Regulation 10(d). It deemed the penalties of license revocation and monetary penalty disproportionate, setting them aside while upholding the security deposit forfeiture. The Tribunal allowed license restoration upon a new security deposit, emphasizing proportionality in penalties.

---

---

The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, CESTAT Mumbai, concerns the revocation of a customs broker license and the forfeiture of a security deposit under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018. The core issues revolve around alleged breaches of specific regulations by the customs broker, M/s Cargo Yatri Private Ltd, in relation to the importation of goods declared as 'perlite ores' but found to be 'black pepper' and 'cigarettes'.

The primary legal questions considered were:

• Whether the customs broker breached Regulation 10(d) by failing to advise the client to comply with statutory provisions and notify authorities of non-compliance.
• Whether the customs broker violated Regulation 10(n) by not verifying the correctness of the Importer Exporter Code (IEC), GSTIN, and the identity and functioning of the client at the declared address.
• The appropriateness of the penalties imposed, including license revocation and security deposit forfeiture, under Regulations 14 and 18.

Regarding Regulation 10(d), the Tribunal analyzed the obligation of a customs broker to advise clients on compliance with customs statutes. The Tribunal noted that the licensing authority failed to demonstrate that incorrect advice was rendered by the broker. The customs broker, being a private limited company, had a structure that was not adequately considered by the licensing authority. The Tribunal emphasized that the regulation does not impose a broad educational duty on brokers but is limited to advice related to specific consignments. The lack of evidence linking the broker's conduct to a breach of this regulation led the Tribunal to conclude that the charge was unsubstantiated.

Under Regulation 10(n), the Tribunal examined the requirement for customs brokers to verify the authenticity of client details using reliable documents. The licensing authority's reliance on the non-response to summons at the importer's address was pivotal in concluding the importer was non-functional. The Tribunal found that the customs broker failed to verify the existence and operational status of the client before handling the consignment, as required by the regulation. The inability to produce evidence of such verification constituted a breach of Regulation 10(n).

The Tribunal considered the proportionality of the penalties imposed. While acknowledging the breach of Regulation 10(n), it deemed the revocation of the license and imposition of the penalty as disproportionate given the specific circumstances. The Tribunal decided to set aside the license revocation and penalty imposition but upheld the forfeiture of the security deposit. It allowed for the restoration of the license upon the appellant making a fresh security deposit as per the regulations.

The Tribunal's significant holdings included:

• The breach of Regulation 10(n) was proven due to the customs broker's failure to verify client details adequately.
• The penalties of license revocation and monetary penalty were disproportionate to the breach established.
• The forfeiture of the security deposit was upheld, with provisions for license restoration contingent on a new security deposit.

The appeal was disposed of on these terms, providing a nuanced interpretation of the obligations under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018, and emphasizing the need for proportionality in regulatory penalties.

---