<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2023 (2) TMI 145 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433630</link>
    <description>Regulation 10(n) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 requires a Customs Broker to make reasonable verification of the client&#039;s identity, IEC, GSTIN and functioning through reliable, independent and authentic material, but it does not require physical inspection of premises or second-guessing the correctness of official issuance of those documents. Verification that IEC and GSTIN were issued by the competent authorities, supported by other reliable identification material, was treated as sufficient. The record also did not establish a proven breach of that duty, as the reports were vague and did not show forged documents, non-existence of the exporters, or knowledge of falsity. On that basis, revocation, forfeiture and penalty were held unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2023 09:15:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=703896" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (2) TMI 145 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433630</link>
      <description>Regulation 10(n) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 requires a Customs Broker to make reasonable verification of the client&#039;s identity, IEC, GSTIN and functioning through reliable, independent and authentic material, but it does not require physical inspection of premises or second-guessing the correctness of official issuance of those documents. Verification that IEC and GSTIN were issued by the competent authorities, supported by other reliable identification material, was treated as sufficient. The record also did not establish a proven breach of that duty, as the reports were vague and did not show forged documents, non-existence of the exporters, or knowledge of falsity. On that basis, revocation, forfeiture and penalty were held unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433630</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>