<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Customs broker licence revocation proceedings under CBLR 2018 timelines, quashed due to delayed show-cause, enquiry report and final order.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95268</link>
    <description>Revocation of a customs broker licence, forfeiture of security deposit, and imposition of penalty were challenged on the ground that mandatory timelines under CBLR, 2018 were breached. The authority issued the show cause notice beyond 90 days from the offence report, submitted the enquiry report beyond 90 days from the show cause notice, and passed the final order beyond the stipulated period under Regulations 17(1), 17(5) and 17(7); these lapses rendered the proceedings and resultant order legally unsustainable, leading to quashing of the revocation, forfeiture, and penalty. The contention based on Circular No. 9/2010 was left open without adjudication. - HC</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Dec 2025 07:49:17 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Dec 2025 07:49:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=873211" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Customs broker licence revocation proceedings under CBLR 2018 timelines, quashed due to delayed show-cause, enquiry report and final order.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95268</link>
      <description>Revocation of a customs broker licence, forfeiture of security deposit, and imposition of penalty were challenged on the ground that mandatory timelines under CBLR, 2018 were breached. The authority issued the show cause notice beyond 90 days from the offence report, submitted the enquiry report beyond 90 days from the show cause notice, and passed the final order beyond the stipulated period under Regulations 17(1), 17(5) and 17(7); these lapses rendered the proceedings and resultant order legally unsustainable, leading to quashing of the revocation, forfeiture, and penalty. The contention based on Circular No. 9/2010 was left open without adjudication. - HC</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Dec 2025 07:49:17 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95268</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>