AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (9) TMI 1415
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ers. Email of DGARM dated 17.8.2020. Based on analysis, risky exporters were identified along with the Customs brokers who processed their Shipping Bills. Exports of 36 of these exporters were processed by the appellant. Physical verification was conducted in respect of two exporters and were found to be non-existent. Letter of Additional Commissioner CGST Delhi South Commissionerate dated 24.1.2020. Investigation was initiated into risky exporters and 10 exporters were found to be non-existent. The appellant was the Customs Broker of the exporters. Show Cause Notice date and alleged violations and proposals 13.8.2020 Violation of CBLR 10(a), (b), (d) (e), (j), (n), (p) and (q) Revoke licence and Forfeit security deposit under CBLR 14 with 17 Impose penalty under CBLR 18 24.12.2020 Violation of CBLR 10 (n) Revoke licence and Forfeit security deposit under CBLR 14 with 17 Impose penalty under CBLR 18 27.4.2020 Violation of CBLR 10(a), (b), (d) (e), (j), (n), (p) and (q) Revoke licence and Forfeit security deposit under CBLR 14 with 17 Impose penalty under CBLR 18 Inquiry Report date and findings 20.10.2020 Violated CBLR 10(a), (b), (d), (e), (j....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o. C/50890 of 2021. 6. In the orders impugned in the other two appeals the appellant is said to have not even obtained an authorization from the exporters, to have not conducted the business by himself or his employees and to have worked through some unauthorized persons violating several regulations of CBLR. 7. We now proceed to examine the obligations of a customs broker under regulations 10(a), (b), (d), (e), (j), (n), (p) and (q) of CBLR which are alleged to have been violated in these two appeals. These read as follows: 10. Obligations of Customs Broker.- A Customs Broker shall - (a) obtain an authorisation from each of the companies, firms or individuals by whom he is for the time being employed as a Customs Broker and produce such authorisation whenever required by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs, as the case may be; (b) transact business in the Customs Station either personally or through an authorised employee duly approved by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs, as the case may be; *** (d) advise his client to comply with the provisions of the Act....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y this office on 30.01.2020 and the above mentioned firm was found non-existent. Assessee has filed Nil return for all tax periods except July, 2019 during 2019-20. Letter, seeking Annexure-A to Circular No. 131/1/2020-GST dated 23.01.2020 was also sent to the Assessee/Exporter on 06.02.2020 and the same was returned back undelivered by the postal authority. The E-way bills and GSTR 2A of M/s Kunj Textile have been analyzed and found that 85 E-way Bills for Rs. 24.30 Cr. As Inward and only 23 E-way Bills for Rs. 14.46 Cr as Outward have been generated during the period October, 2018 to July 2019. Other than this period (October, 2018 - July, 2019), the activity of the assessee remained dormant. M/s Kunj Textile has received supplies from 03 major suppliers during the above said period i.e. October, 2018 - July, 2019. The suppliers are M/s Regent Export India (07CPLPR7203G4ZM), M/s S.S. Industries (07CCIPA1122KIZI) and M/s Spark Enterprises (08DWLPR1513PIZW). Out of the above three, 02 suppliers under Delhi Jurisdiction have been identified as risky supplier as per Report No. 33B issued by DGARM (as verified from the list provided). (ii) ATOG OVER....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tration issued by the officer. As far as the existence of the exporter at the place of business is concerned, it will suffice if the customs broker verifies it on the basis of independent, authentic documents. 13. The order dated 17.06.2021 impugned in this appeal therefore, cannot be sustained and needs to be set aside. 14. In appeal C/ 50889/2021, the offence report, i.e., the letter of the Deputy Commissioner, ACC Export says that the investigation was initiated into six exporters on the basis of specific intelligence that they were indulging in fraudulent exports by creating bogus purchase bills and exporting sub-standard products in order to defraud the exchequer by availing undue IGST and other export benefits. 15. The order assailed in Customs Appeal no. 50891 of 2021 is issued in pursuance of the SCN dated 27.4.2020 based on a letter issued by the Additional Commissioner of CGST South Commissionerate reporting that ten exporters who had exported goods and to whom GSTIN were issued, have been found, on physical verification, to not exist and that the appellant had processed exports of these exporters. 16. In both these cases, on verification, it was found that th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....le value to anyone else. They are not valuables or cash that some employee might steal to profit. We, therefore, uphold the finding of the Commissioner that the appellant had violated Regulation 10(a) of CBLR. 20. Regulation 10(b) reads as follows: (b) transact business in the Customs Station either personally or through an authorised employee duly approved by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs, as the case may be; 21. The undisputed fact is that the appellant did not conduct the business by himself but according to him, Shri Tarun Kumar Verma did the work for him. Shri Verma was not his employee and the appellant had not even sought a G card or H card for Shri Verma. The appellant's explanation was that the owner of the appellant's firm Shri Nawal Kishore Tiwari had lost his wife in a freak accident on 7.2.2018 which required him to keep visiting the hospital and police station, advocates and courts in connection with the police investigation in the matter. Therefore, he had taken help of Shri Naval Kishore Tiwari. Shri Tiwari handled the shipping bills with all the suspect consignments and when confronted, made away with all the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se access to, conceal, remove or destroy the whole or any part of any book, paper or other record, relating to his transactions as a Customs Broker which is sought or may be sought by the Principal Commissioner of Customs or Commissioner of Customs, as the case may be; 27. The Commissioner recorded in the impugned order that the appellant had admitted that he had no KYC documents in respect of the exports. The appellant stated that Shri Verma had run away with all the documents in respect of these exports. However, he filed an FIR only on 20.1.2020 after the department started investigation. He, therefore, found that the appellant had failed to comply with Regulation 10(j). 28. We find that it is a matter of record that the appellant had no records and did not produce any with respect to the exports. This finding of the Commissioner in the impugned order therefore requires no interference. 29. Regulation 10(n) reads as follows: (n) verify correctness of Importer Exporter Code (IEC) number, Goods and Services Tax Identification Number (GSTIN), identity of his client and functioning of his client at the declared address by using reliable, independent, authentic docu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....his credentials to another person, that person cannot file documents in the name of the Customs broker. If the Customs broker gives away his credentials to anyone, no sanctity will be left to the process of licensing customs brokers. 38. An illustration will make this position clear. One may lend one's car to family or friends because in doing so, he is sharing his property. However, one cannot give his driving licence to someone else to use. Driving licence is issued only after necessary tests. If one's driving licence is given away to someone else, no sanctity will be left to the driving licence. Similarly, a lawyer's registration with the Bar Association or a doctor's registration as a medical practitioner cannot be shared with friends or family even if there is an emergency or personal exigency. No lawyer can say that there was a personal tragedy and therefore, he gave his bar registration to his friend to practice in his name. Same holds true of customs brokers. 39. A similar case where the Customs Broker allowed its licence to be used by someone else was decided by the High Court of Delhi in Sriaanshu Logistics versus Commissioner of Customs (General) [2024 (388) E.L.T.....