2016 (3) TMI 1034 - AT - Customs

Seeking modification of confirmation order - Continuation of suspension of Custom Broker licence in terms of Regulation 19(1) of the CBLR, 2013 - Violation of Regulations 11(a), 11(d) and 11(n) of CBLR, 2013 - Misdeclaration of packages of Jaipur Bench and Wooden Floor Lamps exported and and illegal export of red sander and sandal wood - Held that - it is evident that the appellant was handling the consignment of the said exporter for the first time but had neither met the exporter nor verified its antecedents. It did not verify its permanent and present address. This constitutes serious violation of Regulation 11 of CBLR, 2013 on the part of the appellant. Nothing can possibly be a graver mis-conduct on the part of a CHA than to file Shipping Bill without making even preliminary enquiries about the genuineness of exporter in the name of which the S/B was filed. Such dereliction of duty on the part of a CHA, can potentially have even graver financial/security consequences. Thus the appellant totally failed to discharge its duties as CHA as laid down in Regulation 11 of CBLR 2013. Therefore, by applying the decision of Hon ble High Court in the case of CC (General) versus Worldwide Cargo Movers 2006 (11) TMI 281 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT , the Custom Broker licence continued to be suspended. - Decided against the petitioner

Summary

Issues:
1. Suspension of Customs Broker license for violation of regulations.
2. Grounds for immediate suspension of license.
3. Compliance with Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2013.
4. Applicability of case laws in determining suspension of license.
5. Analysis of facts and circumstances leading to the continuation of license suspension.

Issue 1: The appeal was filed against the order confirming the continuation of the appellant's Customs Broker (CB) license suspension due to violations of Regulations 11(a), 11(d), and 11(n) of the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2013 (CBLR, 2013).

Issue 2: The appellant contended that immediate suspension of the license was not warranted, citing case laws such as N.C. Singha & Sons vs. UOI and Kothari & Sons vs. C.C., Jaipur. The violation involved illegal export of prohibited goods, misdeclaration, and failure to verify the exporter's antecedents, justifying the continuation of the license suspension.

Issue 3: The appellant failed to comply with Regulation 11 of CBLR, 2013, which mandates Customs Brokers to verify antecedents, correctness of Importer Exporter Code (IEC) number, and client identity using reliable documents. The appellant neglected to conduct necessary verifications, constituting a serious violation of the regulations.

Issue 4: The judgment analyzed the applicability of various case laws, including Bombay Shipping Agency, N.C. Singha & Sons, and others, to determine the continuation of the license suspension based on the specific facts and circumstances of the case. The importance of filing genuine documents and fulfilling duties as a Customs Broker was emphasized.

Issue 5: The judgment highlighted that the Commissioner formed a clear opinion on the necessity of continuing the license suspension based on the appellant's failure to discharge duties as a Customs Broker. The decision was supported by legal precedents like Worldwide Cargo Movers and H.B. Cargo Services, which emphasized the severity of violations and the imposition of appropriate penalties. The analysis concluded that the impugned order was justified, leading to the rejection of the appeal.