TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 86
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt weight of 1,700 Kgs. Accordingly, proceedings were initiated separately against the Importer and the Appellant-Customs Broker. During investigation, the statements of Mr. T. Raja, Director of the Customs Broker, Bangalore, Mr. Ramesh and Mr. R. Anand working in the Customs Brokers' office at Chennai were recorded. The Commissioner of Customs, Chennai issued a prohibition order to Customs Broker on 09.02.2018, thereafter the Customs Broker License was suspended on 27.03.2018, the Custom Broker filed a Writ Petition before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka and obtained orders staying operation of prohibition dated 28.04.2018. The suspension order of the Customs Broker license was revoked on 05.06.2018. Thereafter the proceedings under CBLR, 2018 were initiated by issue of show cause notice dated 07.06.2018. 3. In the inquiry conducted under Regulation 17 of CBLR, 2018 it was concluded that; failure to obtain authorization and to comply with Regulation 10(a) cannot be sustained; allegation of violation of Regulation 10(d) sustains on the finding that Mr. T. Raja, Director of the Customs Broker did not know Mr. Anand, who works for his company in Chennai and therefore, they....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ith the Appellant-Broker Company. The learned counsel submitted that the findings of the Inquiry Officer relating to the second part of verification of the antecedents of the client was based on wrong premises and therefore, the same is not sustainable. Therefore, the Appellant-Customs Broker has complied with the provisions of Regulation 10(d) and 10(n) of CBLR, 2018 and hence, the impugned order is not sustainable. 5. Further the learned counsel has relied on the following case-laws in support of their submissions. (i) (2025) 27 Centax 368 (Tri.-Cal) - Iww Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Principal Commissioner of Customs (Airport & Acc.), Kolkata, (ii) (2024) 17 Centax 3 (Tri.-Bom) - H2O Logistics Vs. Principal Commissioner of Customs (General), wherein it is held as under: "6.3. From the above, we find that appellants have duly filed the bill of entry as per the documents given by the importer and they were not aware of the mis-declaration of value of the goods. As there is no specific brand name of the imported goods, nothing was mentioned and it could not be said that 'unbranded' needs to be mentioned. In the instant case the mis-declaration was found by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....company/trusts etc., and any two of the listed documents in the annexure. No. Form of organisation Features to be verified Documents to be obtained 1 Individual (i) Legal name and any other names used (ii) Present and Permanent address, in full, complete and correct. (i) Passport (ii) PAN card (iii)Voter's Identity card (iv)Driving licence (v) Bank account statement (vi) Ration card Note : Any two of the documents listed above, which provides client/customer information to the satisfaction of the CHA will suffice." 6.8. We find that in the case of M/s Perfect Cargo & Logistics Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Airport & General), New Delhi 2021 (376) E.L.T. 649 (Tri. - Del.), the Tribunal had decided the issue of KYC verification of the importer/exporter by the Customs broker and the requirements specified in the CBLR, 2018. "34. The basic requirement of Regulation 10(n) is that the Customs Broker should verify the identity of the client and functioning of the client at the declared address by using, reliable, independent, authentic documents, data or information. For this purpose, a detailed guideline on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ses of the client to see if he is operating from the address. It is sufficient if this verification is done using reliable, independent, authentic, documents, data or information. The appellant had obtained all the KYC documents including the GSTIN and IEC which showed that the exporter was operating at that address and it believed so and proceeded to file the Shipping Bills. ....................... 25. As has been decided in several orders, Regulation 10(n), verification of the client operating from the address can be done by the Customs Broker through independent and authentic documents, data or information. The importer exporter code (IEC) issued by the Director General of Foreign Trade and the GSTIN issued by the GST department both qualify as authentic documents. They are deemed to be reliable because they are issued be Government officers. Since the officers are not expected to have any bias, they are also independent documents. It is reasonable for the Customs Broker to trust that these documents have been correctly issued by the officers and proceed accordingly. ........................ 28. We find that if the appellant was guilty of trus....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y of the following grounds, namely:- (a) failure to comply with any of the conditions of the bond executed by him under regulation 8; (b) failure to comply with any of the provisions of these regulations, within his jurisdiction or anywhere else; (c) commits any misconduct, whether within his jurisdiction or anywhere else which in the opinion of the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner of Customs renders him unfit to transact any business in the Customs Station; (d) adjudicated as an insolvent; (e) of unsound mind; and (f) convicted by a competent court for an offence involving moral turpitude or otherwise. ............................ "18. Penalty.- (1) The Principal Commissioner or Commissioner of Customs may impose penalty not exceeding fifty thousand rupees on a Customs Broker or F card holder who contravenes any provisions of these regulations or who fails to comply with any provision of these regulations." (2) The Deputy Commissioner or an Assistant Commissioner of Customs may impose penalty not exceeding ten thousand rupees on a G card holder who contravenes any provisions of these regulations....