Shiv Kumar Gupta Vs Principal Commissioner of Customs (General) (CESTAT Mumbai)
The appeal challenged an order revoking the appellant’s Customs Broker (CB) licence, forfeiting the security deposit and imposing penalty under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations (CBLR), 2018. The proceedings arose from an investigation into alleged overvaluation of export goods and improper availment of export benefits. The department alleged contraventions of Regulations 10(d), 10(e) and 10(n) of the CBLR, 2018 on the ground that the Customs Broker had failed to exercise due diligence, verify KYC documents and fulfil other regulatory obligations while handling exports.
The appellant contended that the action was initiated nearly ten years after the exports, although CBLR, 2018 required preservation of records only for five years. It was also argued that the Customs Broker had no prior knowledge of any alleged overvaluation, had filed shipping bills based on documents provided by the exporter, and could not be held responsible for the exporter’s acts. Reliance was placed on earlier judicial decisions supporting these contentions.
The Tribunal examined the obligations under Regulations 10(d), 10(e) and 10(n) of the CBLR, 2018 and the findings recorded by the licensing authority. It noted that the licensing authority had concluded that the appellant failed to advise the client to comply with the law, relied blindly on the exporter’s documents, and failed to produce the required authorisation, KYC documents and other records.
