Delhi High Court upholds license revocation due to delayed notice issuance

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging the revocation of a Custom Broker license due to a delayed show cause notice issuance. Emphasizing the mandatory 90-day limit under Regulation 20(1) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013, the Court upheld the importance of adhering to statutory timelines. The delay in issuing the notice after the offense report receipt was deemed a legal infirmity, leading to the dismissal of the appeal and application. The decision reiterated the significance of timely compliance in matters involving license revocation.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to order revoking Custom Broker license based on delay in issuing show cause notice.

Analysis:
The appeal before the Delhi High Court challenged the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal's order setting aside the revocation of the Respondent's Custom Broker license by the Commissioner of Customs. The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence reported the Respondent's alleged undervalued importation of DVD player components, leading to the suspension and subsequent revocation of the license. The show cause notice was issued after a significant delay, not meeting the 90-day requirement from the receipt of the offense report as per Regulation 20(1) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013 (CBLR 2013).

The Appellant argued that the time during the license suspension and the delay in forwarding the DRI's report should be excluded from the computation of the limitation period for issuing the show cause notice. However, the Court disagreed, emphasizing the sacrosanct nature of the 90-day limit under Regulation 20(1) of the CBLR 2013. The Court cited previous judgments to support the strict adherence to the prescribed timeline for issuing show cause notices in such cases. Since the show cause notice was not issued within 90 days of receiving the offense report, the delay was deemed a legal infirmity.

The Court concluded that no substantial question of law arose for determination, leading to the dismissal of the appeal and the application. The judgment upheld the decision of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, emphasizing the importance of adhering to statutory timelines in matters concerning the revocation of licenses.

---