The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Delhi, has upheld the revocation of a customs broker’s licence and imposes Rs. 50,000 penalty in two cases involving non-existent exporters and misuse of licence credentials, while granting relief in a third case where the broker was faulted for not verifying GST registrations.
The bench comprising Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) examined the broker’s obligations under Regulation 10 of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations (CBLR), 2018. In the DGARM-related case, the tribunal noted that the exporters had been issued GSTINs and were filing returns, creating a presumption of existence. It ruled that a customs broker cannot be held responsible for questioning registrations granted by government authorities. Accordingly, the order of revocation was set aside. In the other two cases, however, the tribunal found clear evidence of misconduct. The broker had failed to obtain client authorizations, allowed an unauthorized person to use the licence, and did not maintain mandatory KYC records. Such violations, the tribunal held, amounted to serious breaches of trust and regulatory duties.
The proceedings stemmed from multiple investigations launched by the Customs (SIIB-Export), DGARM, and the CGST Delhi South Commissionerate. Authorities alleged that several exporters were found to be non-existent at their declared business premises, despite holding valid GSTINs and Import Export Codes (IECs).
The customs broker in question had processed shipping bills on behalf of these exporters. The Commissioner of Customs (Airport & General), New Delhi, passed three orders revoking the licence, forfeiting the security deposit, and imposing monetary penalties.
The bench drew parallels with earlier rulings of the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court, which held that “sub-letting” or permitting unauthorized use of a customs broker’s licence is a grave violation.
The tribunal likened the responsibility of brokers to that of doctors or lawyers, stating that such licences cannot be shared under any circumstances.
Case Details
Case Title: M/s NP Logistics Versus Commissioner of Customs
Case No.: Customs Appeal No. 50889 Of 2021
Date: 23.09.2025
Counsel For Petitioner: Vaibhav Singh
Counsel For Respondent: Rajesh Singh
Read More: Centre Moves Supreme Court with Curative Petition Against Verdict on Mineral Taxation Rights
