Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2023 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (7) TMI 67 - AT - CustomsRevocation of Customs Brokers License - forfeiture of security deposit - levy of penalty - appellant submitted that the Commissioner while passing the order went beyond the inquiry report inasmuch as the charges in the inquiry report were that the appellant had not tried to tally/match the address given on IEC and GSTIN and that the appellant had not conducted verification of the place of business of the principal exporter - HELD THAT:- The inquiry officer had submitted the report dated 20.05.2022 and the appellant was required to file a reply to this inquiry report. The inquiry report mentions that the appellant had not made an attempt to match the addresses given on IEC and GSTIN and in fact IEC of the exporter had a different address then the one mentioned in the show cause notice or GSTIN - The Commissioner should have, therefore, confined himself to these two issues in the impugned order, but it transpires that there is no discussion on these issues and the impugned order has been passed by the Commissioner on an entirely different ground namely, that the appellant had furnished only one document as against the requirement of two documents in terms of Regulation 10(n) of 2018 Regulations and the Circular dated 08.04.2010. The order passed by the Commissioner, therefore, can be set aside on this ground alone. A bare perusal of Regulation 10(n) would show that the Customs Broker is not required to physically verify the place of business of the exporter and this is what was also held by the Tribunal in COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, NEW DELHI (AIRPORT AND GENERAL) COMMISSIONERATE VERSUS M/S CRM LOGISTICS PRIVATE LIMITED (VICE-VERSA) [2021 (12) TMI 253 - CESTAT NEW DELHI]. The Division Bench examined the responsibility of a Customs Broker under Regulation 10(n) of the 2018 Regulations and in this context held that it is not the responsibility of a Customs Broker to physically go to the premises of each of the exporters to find out whether they are functioning at the premises and Customs Broker has to rely upon the documents that have been issued by the Government. Thus, even the two reasons assigned in the inquiry report could not have been made the basis for revoking the Customs Broker License of the appellant in terms of Regulation 10(n) of the 2018 Regulations. It is, therefore, not possible to sustain the order passed by the Commissioner - Appeal allowed.
|