TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 111
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....capacity as Free Trade Warehousing Zone unit (FTWZ) under the approval of Development Commissioner, CSEZ. 2. The brief facts are that alleging violation of Regulation 11 (d), (e) and (n) of Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2013 (corresponding Regulation 10 (d), (e) and (n) of CBLR, 2018), Show cause Notice (SCN) was issued and Adjudication authority as per the order dated 24.12.2020 revoked the suspension and appointed an Inquiry Officer (IO) on 30.12.2020. The Inquiry officer submitted inquiry report on 30.03.2021, concurring with the finding of the Inquiry Officer, the proceedings were dropped by the Adjudication authority. Aggrieved by the said order, present appeal is filed by Revenue before the Tribunal. 3. When the appeal c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by the said two entities and their associates. During such investigations, DRI recorded statements of the Respondent's Directors, Chandrashekhar Rai and M. Jagannath Rai, which are exculpatory and there is no admission of any knowledge on Respondent's part about the alleged diversion of the export goods by the said two entities and their associates. The said Show Cause Notice contended that the Respondent did not care to verify the genuineness of the said foreign entities to whom the Respondent provided services as FTWZ unit in relation to the imports /purchases in and exports from Arshiya Free Trade Warehousing Zone. 5. Learned AR further submits that the proceedings were initiated on the ground that Respondent has not checked ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s Stations subject to intimation in Form 'C' to the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner of Customs of the Customs Station where he intends to transact business and a copy of this intimation shall also be sent to the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner of Customs who has issued the license in Form B1 or Form B2, as the case may be. The respondents' contention is that they have not intimated to Bombay Customs House. The adjudicating authority finds that no action can be taken under CBLR, 2018 for the transactions in FTWZ when no express permission has been granted by Customs authorities. This non-intimation in Form 'C' should have been treated as omissions and commissions of the respondent rather than the respondent ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... a lapse on their part and cannot be taken as alibi that no permission has been given by the Proper Officer of Customs to work in SEZ Area, under CBLR, 2018. The importer/ exporter and the respondent Customs Broker are only having same name but are different legal entities. The respondent is not an SEZ unit but provided broking services to their own unit situated in SEZ (Group Company). 8. Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent submits that Respondent is holding a valid Customs Broker License and it is renewed from time to time. In addition to said activities, Respondent had carried out business as FTWZ unit in Ashtriya Free Trade Warehousing Zone in SEZ as a separate entity with staff and providing services to international trader....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....per the provisions of CBLR, 2018, there is a provision only for filing appeal by the Customs Broker and not the Department. In this regard Learned Counsel relied on the following decisions:- a. CC Vs. Transworld Cargo & Travels- (2023) 10 Centax 122 (Del), b. CC Vs. Evershine Shipping Customs C & F: Final Order No.50893 dated 6-6-2025, c. CC Vs. Mukadam Freight Systems P. Ltd - 2018 (359) ELT 612. 12. Heard both sides and perused the records. 13. We find that the entire issue is regarding authority of the Appellant to proceed against the Respondent under the provisions of Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2018 (CBLR, 2018). As per the grounds of appeal, the Respondent is involved in illegal import of goo....