9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 67X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fferent 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... scussed case. M/s Maj Shipping Pvt. Ltd., the authorised Customs Broker is required to join the proceedings before the Inquiry officer and to submit his representation, if any, to the inquiry officer within 30 days of the issuance of this Show Cause Notice. The Inquiring authority shall submit a report within 90 days of the issuance of the Show Cause Notice to the Commissioner of Customs (Airport General), New Customs House, New Delhi. 13. Therefore, M/s Maj Shipping Pvt. Ltd. (PAN No. AAJCM6672N) having address at J-6/135, 2nd Floor, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi-110027 holding CB license no. R-07/DEL/CUS/2016 valid upto 14.10.2025 in terms of Regulation 17 of CBLR, 2018 are hereby called upon to Show Cause to the Commissioner of Customs (Airport General), New Custom House, New Delhi within thirty days of the receipt of the Inquiry Report, that in terms of the above paras and the Inquiry Report, why: (i) they should not be held responsible for contravention of provisions of Regulation 10(n) of Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2018; (ii) their Customs Broker License No. R-07/DEL/CUS/2016 valid upto 14.10.2025 should not be revoked and part or whole of the securi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sued on 23.08.2017 in which the address is mentioned as Plot No. 148, Shiv Shakti Nagar Society, Anjana Road, Surat, Gujarat. The SCN has also been issued on 21.02.2022. In regard to mismatch of address of the exporter as given in IEC and as given in GSTIN/SCN, the noticee submits that the exporter s address in IEC is as it was on the date of its issuance i.e. as on 10.08.2015. But later on the exporter s business was shifted to another address at Plot No. 148, Shiv Shakti Nagar Society, Anjana Road, Surat, Gujarat and IEC address was accordingly got amended as Plot No. 148, Shiv Shakti Nagar Society, Anjana Road, Surat, Gujarat in IEC details too. The aforesaid fact is evident from the screen shot of IEC details obtained from ICEGATE as well as from the screen shot of IEC Related details obtained from DGFT website and in both of the aforesaid screen shots, the current IEC address of the said exporter is the same as in the GSTIN i.e. Plot No. 148, Shiv Shakti Nagar Society, Anjana Road, Surat, Gujarat. Thus the ground taken by the inquiry officer that the address given on IEC and GSTIN do not match, hold no grounds. A copy of the screen shot of IEC details obtained from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hence, it is clear that the CB has obtained only one document prescribed in the above mentioned Circular Viz. PAN Card of the exporter and as such have failed to comply with the guidelines. Therefore, it is evident that the CB has contravened the provisions of Regulation 10(n) of the CBLR, 2018. (emphasis supplied) 7. Ms. Pratiksha Singh, learned counsel appearing for the 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, but the reason stated in the impugned order is that out of two documents required to be filed as per the Circular dated 08.04.2010 only one document had been filed. 8. Shri Nagendra Yadav, learned authorised representative appearing for the department, however, supported the impugned order and submitted that since the appellant had provided only one document out of the list contained in the Circular dated 08.04.2010, the Commissioner was justified in passing the ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he inquiry report that the appellant did not furnish a plausible reply. 13. It has also been stated in the inquiry report that the appellant had not physically verified the principal place of business of the exporter. 14. To examine this issue, it would be appropriate to reproduce Regulation 10(n) of 2018 Regulations and it is as follows: Regulation 10. Obligations of Customs Broker A Customs Broker shall (n) verify correctness of Import 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 documents, data or information. 15. 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 General) Vs. M/s CRM Logistics Private Limited Final Order No. 52053-52054 of 2021 dated 03.12.2021 . 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
