2023 (12) TMI 85

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the course of business, the appellant handled export of ball bearings, exported vide four Shipping Bills all dated 21.09.2020 filed by M/s. Gupta Vyapaar. Earlier the appellant had handled several export consignments on behalf of the said exporter during the period 10.09.2020 to 16.09.2020, for which no anomalous report at the time of export has been brought on record. During the course of the investigations regarding the said four live consignments it came to notice that the said consignment was highly over-valued allegedly with intent to defraud the government and avail higher amount of ITC, IGST and other export related incentives. Scrutiny of previous records of M/s. Gupta Vyapaar (Proprietor Shri Udit Gupta), was also therefore carrie....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....i Govind Kumar Thakur was actively involved in facilitation of the export fraud, a show cause notice under the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations 2018, came to be issued to the appellant on 4.06.2021, alleging violations of Regulation 10 (d), (m), (n) and (q) of the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations 2018. The appellant was also charged for violation of Regulation 13(12) of CBLR, 2018 concerning failure of exercising supervision required to ensure proper conduct over the employee. For sake of ready reference Regulation 10 (d), (m), (n) and (q) are reproduced here under: "REGULATION 10. Obligations of Customs Broker.- A Customs Broker Shall- (d) advise his client to comply with the provisions of the Act, other ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... while deciding the question of over valuation on part of the exporter, there is nothing on record to in any way conclusively link the conduct of the said offence with the connivance of the Customs Broker. There is nothing to decisively link the appellant with the commissioning of the said fraud and mere oral, unverified testimony cannot substitute as proof in the matter. It is also not established from records that the chartered engineer was fixed by the appellant. Further, the declaration of the export value is the sole prerogative of the exporter and not that of the Custom Broker, who files the Customs documents as per information supplied by the exporter/importer as the case be. If any conscious contumacious conduct is ascribed to the C....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....equest, for cross-examination was merely brushed aside without any cogent reasons. Under the aforesaid circumstances, there is nothing to demonstrate: a) That the Custom Broker did not advise his client with regard to the compliance of the statutory provisions of the Customs Act. b) That the Customs Broker failed to discharge duties with speed and efficiency. c) That the Custom Broker had failed in verifying the details of the exporter, as provided under Regulation 10(n), using reliable independent, authentic - document, data or information. d) Moreover, no case is simply made out by the department for invoking Regulation 10(q), as we find that the Customer Broker had all along cooperated and coordinated ....