https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751887 CESTAT NEW DELHI allowed the appeal challenging revocation of customs broker license, forfeiture of security deposit, and penalty. The case involved goods exported without DGFT license allegedly falling under SCOMET list. The Tribunal held that exported fermenters and components did not fall under SCOMET list based on description in export documents versus notification entries. The customs house agent could not be expected to be SCOMET expert, especially given technical amendments introduced shortly before export. Violations of CBLR Regulations 11(d), 11(e), and 11(n) were not established as allegations did not fall within regulatory obligations. The severe punishment of license revocation was disproportionate compared to Rs.20,000 penalty under Customs Act. Order set aside. en-us Tue, 23 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 Apr 2024 10:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751887 CESTAT NEW DELHI allowed the appeal challenging revocation of customs broker license, forfeiture of security deposit, and penalty. The case involved goods exported without DGFT license allegedly falling under SCOMET list. The Tribunal held that exported fermenters and components did not fall under SCOMET list based on description in export documents versus notification entries. The customs house agent could not be expected to be SCOMET expert, especially given technical amendments introduced shortly before export. Violations of CBLR Regulations 11(d), 11(e), and 11(n) were not established as allegations did not fall within regulatory obligations. The severe punishment of license revocation was disproportionate compared to Rs.20,000 penalty under Customs Act. Order set aside. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 23 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751887