Mandatory timelines under Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations vitiate proceedings when show cause notice and inquiry report are delayed.

The Madras HC held that the time limits under Regulation 17(1) and Regulation 17(5) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 are mandatory. Because the show cause notice was issued beyond the prescribed period and the inquiry report was submitted after the 90-day limit, the Court found that non-compliance vitiated the proceedings. The Court rejected the view that the timelines were merely directory because no separate consequence was expressly stated, and quashed both the show cause notice and the inquiry report.

---

---

Issues: Whether the timelines prescribed under Regulation 17(1) and Regulation 17(5) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 are mandatory, and whether breach of those timelines vitiates the show cause notice and inquiry report.

Analysis: The Court noted that the material dates were undisputed. The show cause notice was issued beyond the period calculated from receipt of the offence report, and the inquiry report was submitted well after the 90-day period from the show cause notice. It followed the view that the timelines under the Regulations are mandatory and declined to adopt the contrary view that the provisions are merely directory because no consequence is expressly provided.

Conclusion: The timelines under Regulation 17(1) and Regulation 17(5) are mandatory, and non-compliance vitiates the proceedings. The impugned show cause notice and inquiry report were quashed.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded and the challenge to the customs proceedings was accepted in full.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations prescribe fixed periods for issuance of the show cause notice and submission of the inquiry report, those periods are mandatory, and breach of either timeline invalidates the proceedings.

---