https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751918 CESTAT Delhi allowed the appeal of a customs broker challenging revocation of license, forfeiture of security deposit, and penalty for alleged violation of Regulation 10(n) of Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013. The department claimed the broker failed to verify client identity and functioning addresses, citing subsequent investigations showing non-existent entities. CESTAT held that the broker fulfilled obligations under Regulation 10(n) by obtaining authentic government documents like GSTIN, IEC, and PAN cards for client verification. The regulation does not require physical premises verification or continuous surveillance of clients. The impugned order dated 16.06.2021 was set aside with consequential relief. en-us Fri, 26 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 Jan 2025 15:31:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751918 CESTAT Delhi allowed the appeal of a customs broker challenging revocation of license, forfeiture of security deposit, and penalty for alleged violation of Regulation 10(n) of Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013. The department claimed the broker failed to verify client identity and functioning addresses, citing subsequent investigations showing non-existent entities. CESTAT held that the broker fulfilled obligations under Regulation 10(n) by obtaining authentic government documents like GSTIN, IEC, and PAN cards for client verification. The regulation does not require physical premises verification or continuous surveillance of clients. The impugned order dated 16.06.2021 was set aside with consequential relief. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 26 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751918