Court overturns license revocation citing procedural errors, stresses compliance with time limits.

The Court set aside the order revoking the Customs Broker license due to procedural violations, including the delayed issuance of the show cause notice and inquiry report. Emphasizing the mandatory nature of time limits under the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, the judgment highlighted the importance of timely compliance. Citing previous cases, the Court stressed the significance of adhering to procedural requirements. The writ petition was allowed, with no costs imposed on either party.

---

---

Issues: Challenge to revocation of Customs Broker license and forfeiture of bank guarantee due to procedural violations.

The judgment pertains to a writ petition challenging the revocation of a Customs Broker (CB) license and the forfeiture of a bank guarantee by the Commissioner of Customs. The challenge was based on the procedural irregularities in the issuance of the show cause notice (SCN) and the subsequent proceedings. The SCN was issued beyond the prescribed 90-day period from the date of receipt of the offence report, violating Regulation 20 of the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations 2013 (CBLR). The petitioner's license was initially suspended, and despite an appeal to the Customs Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) and subsequent orders, the procedural lapses continued.

The Court noted that the SCN was issued after the stipulated 90-day period, rendering all proceedings invalid as per the regulations. The inquiry report was also delayed significantly, being submitted 13 months after the initial license suspension. The judgment emphasized the mandatory nature of the time limits set out in the regulations, citing previous decisions that highlighted the importance of adhering to these timelines. The Court referred to various cases, including Shankar Clearing & Forwarding v. C. C., Commissioner of Customs (General) v. S. K. Logistics, and others, underscoring the significance of timely compliance with procedural requirements.

In light of the procedural violations and the failure to adhere to the prescribed time limits, the Court set aside the impugned order revoking the petitioner's license. The judgment reiterated the sacrosanct nature of the time limits specified in Regulation 20 of the CBLR/Regulation 22 of the Customs House Agent Licensing Regulations, emphasizing the need for strict adherence to procedural requirements in such matters. Ultimately, the writ petition was allowed, and no costs were imposed on either party.

---