9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 473X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nagement [DGARM] to the field formations. 2. The said e-mail dated 17.08.2020 is reproduced below :- "In connection with the analysis being undertaken for identification of risky exporters involved in IGST refund frauds, feedback from field formations was analyzed to examine possible collusion of Customs Brokers with risky exporters in the execution of frauds. After analyzing the data for 2710 adversely reported cases of identified risky exporters including that of 2005 exporters who could not be verified physically (untraceable), it was revealed that 62 Customs Brokers handled consignments for multiple untraceable exporters. 2. In terms of Regulation 10 (n) of the Customs Broker licensing Regulations (CBLR), 2018 the Customs Brokers a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r also forfeited the security deposit and imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000/-. The relevant portion of the order passed by the Commissioner is reproduced below :- "23. I further note that the analysis being undertaken by the DGARM, New Delhi for identification of risky exporters involved in IGST refund frauds, feedback from field formations was analyzed by the DGARM to examine possible collusion of Customs Brokers with risky exporters in the execution of frauds. After analyzing the data for adversely reported cases of identified risky exporters including that of exporters who could not be verified physically (untraceable), it was also revealed that certain Customs Brokers handled consignments for multiple untraceable exporters. As per the l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the CB. It was observed that except in case of Unique Impex with GSTIN - 07FPBPS2559FIZO, CB seems to have followed the KYC guidelines as per the aforementioned Circular No. 09/2010-Customs dated 08.04.2010 but doesn't seem to have taken the photographs of the Exporter as mandated by the above circular. In case of Unique Impex the CB has taken the PAN Card on record as mandated by the above circular but no other documents mentioned in the aforementioned Circular has been taken by the CB. It is also pertinent to mention that in case of Unique Impex, CB wasn't mandated to take on record "IEC, Allotment of IEC, Provisional Certificate of Registration and GST Registration". 4. Shri Vaibhav Singh, learned counsel for the appellant placed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... produced before us. Both sides agree that there were no relied upon documents to the SCN. 10. The report of the Inquiry officer is based on two facts- firstly, that the appellant filed Shipping Bills on behalf of the 24 exporters which the appellant is not disputing and secondly, the report from the DGARM says that the exporters do not exist. Since DGARM sent an email stating that the exporters did not exist, the inquiry officer concluded the appellant must have violated Regulation 10(n) and must not have carried out the necessary verification. The finding in the impugned order that the appellant has violated Regulation 10 (n) of CBLR 2018, is also based on nothing but a communication which the Commissioner is said to have received from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
