TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (9) TMI 1109
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 (for short, the CBLR, 2018) as illegal, arbitrary and barred by limitation. 2. Heard both. 3. The facts leading to filing of this writ petition are as follows : (i) One M/s.Anomsoft Solutions Private Limited, which is an importer, had imported goods. Pursuant to an investigation initiated against the said importer, the goods were examined and after examination, it was found that the items mentioned in the Bills of Entry had no relation with the business activities mentioned in the GST numbers of the importer. The petitioner filed the Bills of Entry as a customs broker. Thereafter, the investigation was conducted with the importer and their statement was recorded. Searches were also conduc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he said show cause notice, the petitioner filed a detailed written statement of defence dated 15.2.2025 denying the allegations made in the said show cause notice by taking a stand that the said show cause notice was issued beyond the period of 90 days, which was illegal as per the judgments of this Court. In their reply, the petitioner also requested the second respondent to make available the Examiners, the Appraisers and the Shed Superintendent, who had examined the goods for the Bills of Entry dated 11.10.2022 and 19.10.2022, one Mr.Vijayakumar, the Director of the importer, the Examiners, the Appraisers and the Shed Superintendent, who had examined the goods for the Bills of Entry dated 29.11.2022, the person, who gave the chemical ana....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o be dismissed by this Court. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner made the following submissions : (a) As per Regulation 17(5) of the CBLR, 2018, the report has to be submitted within a period of 90 days from the date of issuance of notice under Sub-Regulation (1). This is a mandatory requirement and if the period is crossed, the proceedings itself will stand vitiated. (b) To substantiate this submission, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the following decisions: "(1) of a learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of KTR Logistics Solutions Private Limited Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai [reported in 2020 (371) ELT 685]; (2) of a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rectory in nature and not mandatory since the provision does not stipulate any consequence if the time lines are not adhered to. The petitioner, by participating during the entire process, has waived their right and therefore, they are estopped from raising the ground of limitation. The case is now at the stage of Sub-Regulation (6) of Regulation 17 of the CBLR, 2018 and as per the inquiry report, the only violation that has been found against the petitioner is under Regulation 10(q) of the CBLR, 2018. This violation would be inquired into and the Principal Commissioner or the Commissioner of Customs would take a final decision. (b) Even before such a final decision is taken, the above writ petition has been filed before this Court....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ses, which right is given under Regulation 17(4) of the CBLR, 2018. 9. As per Regulation 17(5) of the CBLR, 2018, the inquiry report must be submitted within a period of 90 days from the date of issuance of the notice under Sub-Regulation (1). In the case in hand, the show cause notice was issued on 17.1.2025 and the petitioner submitted their reply on 15.2.2025. The opportunity of personal hearing was granted from 28.4.2025 and ultimately, the impugned inquiry report dated 27.6.2025 came to be submitted by the second respondent. Obviously, the impugned inquiry report has been given nearly after 161 days. 10. Hence, the question is as to whether the impugned inquiry report given beyond the time lines will vitiate the entire proceeding....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... if the time lines are crossed, the proceedings itself will stand abated/vitiated. This Court is bound by the earlier orders passed by both the Division Benches as well as the learned Single Judges. Further, this Court cannot render a different finding in this regard. 15. The learned Additional Solicitor General submitted that the delay is attributable to the petitioner. 16. However, this argument does not hold water since, even as on the date of first hearing namely 28.4.2025, the 90 days' period already expired and therefore, if there is any delay during the personal hearing, that does not, in any way, improve the case of the respondents. 17. It is true that the Principal Commissioner or the Commissioner of Customs will take ....