Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: import export code in Jyoti Customs Broker Services Pvt Ltd vs -Kolkata(Admn Airport) on 2 May, 2023Matching Fragments
(c) If the answer to (a) is affirmative, is the forfeiture of security deposit correct?
5. The finding recorded in paragraph 12.5 of the impugned order is that the appellant handled exports in respect of several exporters listed in paragraph 4 of the impugned order who are untraceable and therefore, the appellant has violated Regulation 10 (n) of CBLR. There is no document to support the allegation that the exporters listed in paragraph 4 of the SCN did not exist.
6. The case of the Revenue is that since these firms were found to be not functioning from the registered premises when physically verified by the Departmental officers, they never existed in the first place and it was the obligation of the appellant as a 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 ITC declared address by using reliable, independent, authentic documents, data or information" [Regulation 10(n)] and the appellant failed to discharge this obligation and hence it is liable for the consequences of revocation of its licence and forfeiture of the security deposit. The SCN cited CBIC Circular No.9/2010-Customs dated 8.4.2010 giving KYC guidelines and alleged that the appellant failed to exercise due diligence and grossly violated the KYC guidelines of the said Circular dated 8.4.2010 read with CBLR, 2018 as a number of exporters have been found to be untraceable. As per the mandate of Regulation 10(n) of the CBLR, 2018 read with the Circular No. 9/2010- Customs dated 8.4.2010, it was incumbent upon the CB to verify the identity and functioning of his client at the declared address by using reliable, independent, authentic documents, data or information which apparently the CB have failed to do.
11. We observe that the Customs Brokers play an important role in the Customs administration and have to fulfill their responsibilities and obligations under the law. The law in question in this case is Regulation 10(n) of CBLR, 2018.
12. Regulation 10(n) of CBLR 2018 assigns certain responsibilities to the CB. For the sake of easy reference, the said Regulation reproduced below:
"10. Obligations of Customs Broker- A Customs Broker shall-
....(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.,"
13. We have to examine whether the CB has complied with the provisions of the above said regulation. We find that the Tribunal has examined the scope of these obligations in the case of M/S Anax Air Services Pvt Limited vs Commissioner of Customs, (Airport and General), New Delhi. The relevant portion of the order is reproduced below:
"22. We now proceed to examine the scope of the obligations of the Customs Broker under Regulation 10(n). It requires the Customs Broker to verify correctness of Importer Exporter Code (IEC) number, Goods and Customs Appeal No. 75640 of 2021 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 can be broken down as follows:
28. 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 premises and does not inform the authorities or does not get his documents amended, such act or omission of the client cannot be held against the Customs Broker. Of course, if the Customs Broker was aware that the client has moved and continues to file documents with the wrong address, it is a different matter. 29 When a Government officer issues a certificate or registration with an address to an exporter, it is not for the Customs Broker to sit in judgment over such a certificate. The Customs Broker cannot be faulted for trusting the certificates issued by a government officer. It is a different matter if documents are not authentic and are either forged by the Customs Broker or the Customs Broker has reason to believe that the documents submitted to him were forged. It has been held by the High Court of Delhi in Kunal Travels that "the CHA is not an inspector to weigh the genuineness of the transaction. It is a processing agent of documents with respect of clearance of goods through customs house and in that process only such authorized personnel of the CHA can enter the customs house area........ It would Customs Appeal No. 75640 of 2021 be far too onerous to expect the CHA to inquire into and verify the genuineness of the IE code given to it by a client for each import/export transaction. When such code is mentioned, there is a presumption that an appropriate background check in this regard i.e., KYC, etc. would have been done by the customs authorities....." (emphasis supplied)."