Per Mr. VASA SESHAGIRI RAO

The present appeal has been filed by M/s. Shalom Forwarders (hereinafter referred to as “the appellant”), a licensed Customs Broker holding Customs Broker Licence No. TTN/16/2010 issued by the Commissioner of Customs, Tuticorin and valid up to 01.06.2030, assailing Order-in-Original No. 09/2025 dated 13.05.2025 (hereinafter referred to as “the impugned order”) passed under Regulation 17(7) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as “CBLR, 2018”), whereby the licence of the appellant was revoked, security deposit forfeited and penalty imposed for alleged contravention of Regulations 10(n) and 10(j) of the CBLR, 2018. The proceedings arise out of Bill of Entry No.7045785 dated 25.07.2023 filed by the appellant on behalf of M/s. Reloyn Tradex Trading Private Limited for clearance of goods declared as “Slaked Lime” under CTH 25222000. The department alleged that the importer was non-existent/fictitious and that the appellant failed to verify the antecedents and functioning of the importer at the declared address and failed to properly supervise its employees. Following investigation by SIIB officers at JNCH, Mumbai, suspension order dated 25.09.2024 was issued under Regulation 16(1) of CBLR, 2018, followed by Show Cause Notice No.02/2024 dated 20.11.2024 proposing revocation of licence under Regulation 17(1) for alleged violation of Regulations 10(n) and 10(j). After inquiry proceedings and submission of Inquiry Report dated 11.02.2025, the Commissioner passed the impugned order revoking the licence, forfeiting the security deposit and imposing penalty of Rs.50,000/-.

2. Aggrieved by the said order, the present appeal has been filed before this Tribunal.

3. The Ld. Advocate Shri A.K. Jayaraj appeared for the Appellant and the Ld. Authorized Representatives Shri Anoop Singh and Shri Vineet Goyal appeared for the Revenue.

4. The Ld. Counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the impugned order is wholly unsustainable both on facts and in law and has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice, settled principles governing revocation proceedings under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 and the binding judicial precedents governing the scope of obligations of a Customs Broker.

4.1 It is contended that the appellant had duly verified the IEC particulars, GST registration, PAN, Aadhaar, Udyam registration and other KYC credentials of the importer through official Government portals before undertaking Customs clearance work and that such verification stands acknowledged even in the impugned order and in the statement of the G-card holder extracted in the appeal paper-book. The learned counsel submits that Regulation 10(n) merely requires reasonable verification through reliable, independent and authentic documents, data or information and does not impose an obligation of compulsory physical verification of every importer’s premises or continuous surveillance over subsequent business activities. In support, reliance is placed upon Jyoti Customs Broker Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Principal Commissioner of Customs reported in 2023 (385) ELT 404 (Tri.-Kolkata), Raid International Services Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs reported in 2023 (386) ELT 567 (Tri.-Kolkata), Him Logistics Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs reported in 2016 (338) ELT 725 (Tri.-Del.) and Kunal Travels (Cargo) v. Commissioner of Customs (I&G), IGI Airport, New Delhi reported in 2017 (354) ELT 447 (Del.), wherein it has been consistently held that verification through Government-issued registrations constitutes substantial compliance under Regulation 10(n) and that Customs Brokers are not expected to undertake roving investigations into every importer/exporter transaction.

4.2 It is further submitted that there is no allegation or evidence whatsoever establishing prior knowledge, deliberate connivance, active facilitation, fabrication of documents or pecuniary gain on the part o