https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783725 The dominant issue was whether revocation of a customs broker licence, forfeiture of security deposit, and penalty could be sustained despite breach of mandatory timelines under CBLR, 2018. The HC held that the show cause notice was issued beyond 90 days from the offence report in violation of reg. 17(1); the enquiry report was submitted beyond 90 days from the show cause notice contrary to reg. 17(5); and the final order was not passed within the stipulated period under reg. 17(7). Treating these regulatory timelines as binding, the HC found the proceedings vitiated in law and quashed the revocation, forfeiture, and penalty, allowing the petition. en-us Fri, 12 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 22 Dec 2025 07:49:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783725 The dominant issue was whether revocation of a customs broker licence, forfeiture of security deposit, and penalty could be sustained despite breach of mandatory timelines under CBLR, 2018. The HC held that the show cause notice was issued beyond 90 days from the offence report in violation of reg. 17(1); the enquiry report was submitted beyond 90 days from the show cause notice contrary to reg. 17(5); and the final order was not passed within the stipulated period under reg. 17(7). Treating these regulatory timelines as binding, the HC found the proceedings vitiated in law and quashed the revocation, forfeiture, and penalty, allowing the petition. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 12 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783725