Case Law Details
Sai Chhaya Impex Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi)
CESTAT Delhi held that 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.
Facts- Directorate General of Analytics and Risk Management of the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs analysed the data and identified risky exporters involved in execution of frauds and got verification done by the jurisdictional GST officers and identified exporters who could not be found at all physically at their registered premises. DGARM also found that exports by these exporters were handled by certain Customs Brokers including the appellant herein and reported to the respective Commissionerates including the Respondent herein. The Respondent issued a show cause notice to the appellant and appointed an Inquiry officer. After considering the reply to the SCN and the inquiry report, the Commissioner passed impugned order holding that the appellant had violated Regulation 10(n) of the CBLR.
Conclusion- Verification of certificates part of the obligation under Regulation 10(n) on the Customs Broker is fully satisfied as long as it satisfies itself that the IEC and the GSTIN were, indeed issued by the concerned officers. This can be done through online verification, comparing with the original documents, etc. and does not require an investigation into the documents by the Customs Broker. The presumption is that a certificate or registration issued by an officer or purported to have been issued by an officer was correctly issued.
Held that the onus on the Customs Broker cannot, therefore, extend to verifying that the officers have issued the certificate or registration correctly.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
