Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (2) TMI 739

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s. It was noted that the appellant had handled the consignments of 15 risky exporters whose premises could not be verified physically or were untraceable. Based on the reports received, the jurisdictional Commissioner alleged that the appellant had violated the provisions of CBLR, 2018 by not following the KYC guidelines. The CB license was suspended and thereafter, the inquiry as mandated was conducted. The impugned order was passed ordering for revoking the license, forfeiture of deposit and imposition of penalty. 3. The learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that no relied upon documents such as the DGARM report was shared with the appellant, thereby violating the principles of natural justice. He contended that in the order in original, three exporters'physical verification report cited against the appellant are of M/s Samium Fabrication Private Limited, Grow Well Overseas and Shyam Traders. The verification report of these three exportersare not substantiated, nor stated in the show cause notice and there is no evidence that the three are in any way connected to the appellant as the appellant had not handled their consignments. The counsel further added that with the int .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t, data or information, which was done by the appellant. He relied on the following decisions to support his contention: (i) M/s Bright Clearing and Carrier Private Limited vs Commissioner of Customs (Airport & General) and M/s Star Carriers vs Commissioner of Customs, (Airport and General) [2022 (11) TMI 935 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] (ii) Mauli Worldwide Logistics vs Commissioner of Customs, (Airport and General) [2022-TIOL-603-CESTAT-DEL] 6. While reiterating the findings of the adjudicating authority, the learned Authorised Representative submitted that the Tribunal in M/s Baraskar Brothers vs Commissioner of Customs (General), Mumbai [2009(244) ELT 562] had upheld that "there is no second opinion of the fact that the CHA is a very important component in the whole system of Customs Administration, which has a bearing on Customs revenue collection and national security. The CHAs cannot shy away from the responsibilities and obligations casted upon them by law". In this context, the learned Authorised Representative submitted that the appellant did not take the documents as prescribed in the annexure to the Board's circular wherein the CB, in case of a company, has to obtain Certif .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y cast on the CB as per the above regulation is fulfilled if the Customs broker obtains at least two KYC documents. It is not the responsibility of the Customs Broker to physically inspect the premises of each of its clients to ensure that it is operating from that address. He submits that it is far too onerous for the Customs Broker to fulfil such a responsibility. We find that Regulation 10(n) requires the Customs Broker to verify correctness of Importer 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. This obligation essentially involves two step verification viz., the correctness of IEC number and the correctness of GSTIN and in addition, verify the identity and functioning of the client using reliable, independent, authentic documents, data or information. It is noted that IEC and GSTIN are issued by the Government departments. Therefore, any verification would be based on the copies of these documents submitted by the client/exporter, which can be verified independently online in DGFT/GSTN portal .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ertificate or registration issued by an officer or purported to have been issued by an officer correctly issued. Section 79 of the Evidence Act, 1872 requires even Courts to presume that every certificate which is purported to be issued by the Government officer to be genuine. It reads as follows: 79. Presumption as to genuineness of certified copies. The Court shall presume to be genuine every document purporting to be a certificate, certified copy or other document, which is by Law declared to be admissible as evidence of any particular fact and which purports to be duly certified by any officer of the Central Government or of a State Government, or by any officer in the State of Jammu and Kashmir who is duly authorized thereto by the Central Government. Provided that such document is substantially in the form and purports to be executed in the manner directed by law in that behalf. The Court shall also presume that any officer by whom any such document purports to be signed or certified, held, when he signed it, the official character which he claims in such paper. 8. The onus on the Customs Broker cannot, therefore, extend to verifying that the officers have issued the cert .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on so long as they are reliable, independent and authentic. Nothing in this clause requires the Customs Broker to physically go to the premises of the client to ensure that they are functioning at the premises. We find that both the GSTIN as well as the IEC indicates the address of the client. This in itself is independent data to verify the correctness of the identity/address of the client. We also note that there is nothing on record to show that either of these documents were fake or forged. Therefore, once verification of the address is complete as discussed above, the responsibility cast on the appellant under Regulation 10(n) stands fulfilled. In this regard, we note that the Principal Bench of this Tribunal in the case of M/s Mauli Worldwide Logistics vs Commissioner of Customs (A&G) [2022-TIOL-603-CESTAT-DEL] held as follows: "31. The responsibility of the Customs Broker under Regulation 10(n) does not include keeping a continuous surveillance on the client to ensure that he continues to operate from that address and has not changed his operations. Therefore, once verification of the address is complete, as discussed in the above paragraph, if the client moves to a new pr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates