TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (8) TMI 1222
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f 2024 is dismissed as being infructuous. 2.1. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the appellants herein is a Customs Broker (CB) holding a regular CB license issued by the Mumbai Customs under Regulation 7(2) of Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations (CBLR), 2018. On the basis of specific intelligence developed by Customs officers of Special Intelligence & Investigation Branch-Exports [SIIB(X)], Jawaharlal Nehru Customs House (JNCH), it was found that "Red Sanders" (Pterocarpus Santalinus), an endangered species and covered under Appendix-II of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) is being attempted to be exported in one export consignment. 2.2 Further investigation conducted by SIIB-X revealed that Red Sanders, a prohibited item for export were smuggled in the guise of export of some other goods, viz., Craft Paper (Packing) in Container No. PMLU- 9008054 from JNCH, Nhava Sheva Port to Jebel Ali Port, UAE against Shipping Bill (S/B) No. 8692568 dated 29.11.2013 filed by an exporter M/s. Kinjal Enterprises, Pune through the Customs Broker M/s. Exim Management Services (CHA.PNR - 54), Kothrud, Pune. Therefore, SIIB(X....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r the cargo was stuffed into the container, by arranging the transport and the driver for the export consignment. Thus, it is the exporter who managed to take over the original shipment from ICD Dighi and on the way to the JNCH, Nhava Sheva Port, the said declared cargo was replaced with Red Sanders, which is prohibited for export. Therefore, Shri Durgesh P. Chavan appeared to be the mastermind who had devised the modus operandi ingeniously to succeed in the export of prohibited goods. 2.4 On completion of investigation conducted by SIIB(X), for the offences committed under the Customs Act, 1962, in respect of export shipment filed under S/B No. 8692568 dated 29.11.2013, the departmental authorities had initiated separate proceedings by issue of Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated 07.05.2014, which was adjudicated by the Additional Commissioner of Customs, JNCH in order dated 04.11.2015, by confiscating the prohibited 'red sanders' goods attempted for illegal export. However, he refrained in imposing penalties on the exporter and other conoticees including the appellants CB, on the ground that the on-going investigation on the role of various persons has not been completed, reserving th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... be exported from Mumbai; however, subsequently, the exporter informed that they intend to export the consignment from Inland Container Depot (ICD), Dighi, Pune. As the appellants did not have a clearance facility or office in Pune, the customs broking business for such export was given to the other CB, M/s Exim Management Services. Since, the appellants CB did not act as the customs broker for the export done by the said exporter, they claimed that they were not obligated to advise or report any non-compliance to the Customs authorities. Therefore, he claimed that the appellants did not contravene Regulation 10(d) and 10 (n) of CBLR, 2018. 3.2 Learned Advocate also stated that the appellants made sincere efforts to verify the credentials of the exporter and denies the allegation that they failed to follow the mandated Regulation 10 (n) ibid as they obtained certified copies of essential documents, including the Importer Exporter Code (IEC), PAN Card, Aadhar Card, VAT Registration Certificate, Bank Verification Letter, Notarized copy of Warehouse Rent Agreement, AD code Registration document, though not obliged under the Regulation. The physical verification of credentials is not ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....de whether the appellant Customs Broker has fulfilled all his obligations as required under CBLR, 2018 or not. The specific sub-regulations which were alleged to have been violated by the appellants are Regulations 10(d) and 10(n) ibid, and hence there are two distinct charges framed against the appellants. We find that the Regulation 10 of CBLR, 2018, provide for the obligations that a Customs Broker is expected to be fulfilled during their transaction with Customs in connection with import and export of goods. These are as follows: "Regulation 10. Obligations of Customs Broker: - A Customs Broker shall - ... (d) advise his client to comply with the provisions of the Act and in case of non-compliance, shall bring the matter to the notice of the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs, as the case may be; ... (n) verify correctness of Importer Exporter Code (IEC)number, Good and Services Tax Identification Number (GSTIN), identity of his client and functioning of his client at the declared address by using reliable, independent, authentic documents, data or information;" 6.2. We find that the Principal Commissioner of Customs had come ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing given in the impugned order that initially the documents were received by the appellants CB is not relevant, since the actual export transaction had taken place through other CB at Pune, and the appellants CB have no role to play in such export transaction. For the same reason, the appellants CB are not required under CBLR to report about some other exports which is not being dealt by them at some other Customs station, as they do not have any locus standi in such matters. 8.2 In the instant case, mis-declaration of the description of the goods in the S/B as 'Kraft paper', for smuggling out of the country the prohibited 'Red Sanders', was submitted by the CB M/s Exim Management Services, by filing the same online from their office, as it is evident from the face of the shipping Bill. Thus, there is no possibility for the appellants CB to either know the actual content of the export goods and to bring to the notice of the Deputy Commissioner of Customs (DC) or Assistant Commissioner of Customs (AC) about the mis-declaration of export goods or about the delay in transportation of such export goods. Thus, we are of the considered view that the violation of Regulation 10(d) ibid, ....