Customs broker licensing timelines are mandatory; inordinate delay vitiates revocation and security deposit forfeiture.

In customs broker licensing proceedings, compliance with the prescribed timelines is a necessary condition for validity. Where the inquiry and consequential decision are completed after substantial delay beyond the regulatory period, the delay is not a mere irregularity but vitiates the disciplinary action. On that reasoning, the revocation of the licence and forfeiture of the security deposit were held unsustainable, and the impugned order was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether inordinate delay in completing customs broker licensing proceedings, contrary to the prescribed timelines, vitiated the revocation of licence and forfeiture of security deposit.

Analysis: The proceedings under the customs broker licensing regime were initiated and concluded after substantial delay far beyond the time periods prescribed in the applicable regulations. The Tribunal followed the view that the stipulated timelines are an essential requirement for the legality and sanctity of such disciplinary proceedings. Since the inquiry and consequential decision were completed long after the permissible period, the delay could not be treated as a mere irregularity.

Conclusion: The delay vitiated the impugned action, and the revocation of licence as well as forfeiture of security deposit were not sustainable.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded, and the impugned order was set aside on the ground that the licensing proceedings were completed in violation of the prescribed timelines.

Ratio Decidendi: In customs broker licensing proceedings, compliance with the prescribed timelines is a necessary condition for validity, and inordinate delay in concluding the proceedings renders the disciplinary action unsustainable.

---