9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 1381X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the document submitted. It is not the case of the department that the documents had been obtained for forged documents as noted above. The appellant had submitted the KYC documents, and it is also on record that the importer/exporter had duly appeared for statement as in when summoned by the department. In the instant case, it is noted that the Department has not led any evidence to show that the appellant had in any manner facilitated exports by non-existent exporter for availing export incentives. From the above, it is evident that the importer/exporter was available at the time of import, as is evident from the fact that his statement was recorded on 10.02.2022 and 24.02.2022. It has been submitted by the department that the appellant did not verify the GSTIN as the same was cancelled. It has been submitted before us that the software linked to ICEGATE had automatically taken the Aadhar number of the importer instead of the GSTIN. This has not been controverted by the Department in their submissions. It is not the case of the Department that the said Aadhar number is fake or fraudulent - it is evident from the fact that this was not a case of an exporter who was non-existent or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oceedings under CBLR, 2018 were initiated against the appellant.He contended that the said exporter did not fall within the purview of the said report, as M/s Darix Enterprises had been allowed to re-export the imported goods, after adjudication followed by imposition of redemption fine and penalty. Hence, he submitted that this was not the case of exports under LUT for availing exports benefits. 3.1 Learned Counsel furthercontended that the impugned order was legally unsustainable as the SCN is vague and does not spell out the allegations clearly. He relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Primus Logistics Private Ltd. vs. Commissioner of (A&G ) [2024 (24) Centax 265 (Tri. Del.)]. Learned counsel also submitted that the DGARM Report was incorrect in respect of the appellant. The said report related to exports under LUT by non-existent entities for availing export incentives, IGST refunds or ITC refunds. However, he submitted that the instant S/B No. 9279910 dated 22.03.2022was filed for re-export of imported goods. Hence, there was no question of availing of any export benefit in the present case. Learned counsel stated that the appellant had not violated provisions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ments, 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. Hence, the appellant had contravened the provisions of Regulation 10(n) of CBLR, 2018. The IEC, GSTN were obtained just prior to consignment. The rent agreement was of the same month of GST registration and IEC. The premises had been hired during peak Covid period in the month of Sept. 2020. The goods imported were old and used photocopiers, which was restricted goods as per DGFT Policy. The appellant CB filed another B/E with invalid/wrong GSTN No. without authorization. 4.1. Ld. AR further submitted that the Board vide Circular No. 09/2010-Customs dated 08.04.2010 has specifically prescribed "Know Your Customer KYC guidelines to the CBs/CHAs so that the CBS/CHAs are not facilitating intentionally or unintentionally, importers / exporters indulging in fraudulent activities. Hence, a detailed guidelines on the list of documents to be verified and obtained from the client/customer had been also provided. Here, it evident that the CB failed to exercise due diligence and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -existent entities for availing export incentives, IGST refunds or ITC refunds. 6. We note that the CB License of the appellant has been revoked on the grounds that Rule 10 (n) of the CBLR, 2018 was violated. The said regulation is reproduced hereafter: "Regulation 10(n): 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;" The basic requirement of regulation 10(n) is that the customs broker should verify the identity of the client and functioning of the client at the declared address by using reliable, independent, authentic documents, data or information. For this purpose, a detailed guideline on the list of documents to be verified and obtained from the client is has been mentioned. In the context of the present case, we note that the CB has the required KYC documents such as PAN, Aadhar, IEC and none of these have been found to be fake. We note that the CB had carried out due diligence at the time of filing of the documents and there is no requirement for actual phy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
