ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation
Date: 16.02.2026
CESTAT Kolkata Sets Aside Customs Broker License Revocation Over Procedural Lapse
This Article has been written by Advocate Ravi Shekhar Jha-BALLB & LLM (Constitutional Law) based in New Delhi. The views expressed are based on his interpretation of the law. He can be reached at his email idย intelconsul@gmail.comor on his Mobile +91-9999005379.
The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Kolkata, recently delivered a significant judgment in the case of M/s Chatterji & Co. vs. Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata. โ This case revolved around the revocation of a Customs Broker License under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 (CBLR 2018). โ The Tribunal’s decision to set aside the revocation order highlights the importance of adhering to procedural timelines and principles of natural justice in adjudication processes.
Background of the Case
The appellant, M/s Chatterji & Co., was issued a Show Cause Notice (SCN) on July 16, 2019, for alleged violations of the provisions of CBLR 2018. โ This SCN was based on an Offence Report received from the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) on April 30, 2019. โ Subsequently, the appellant’s Customs Broker License was suspended on May 1, 2019. โ
The appellant challenged the suspension order, and the CESTAT Kolkata, in its Final Order No. 75731/2024 dated April 19, 2024, set aside the suspension order, citing delayed action by the Revenue authorities. โ However, the Principal Commissioner of Customs later revoked the appellant’s license through an Order-in-Original (OIO) dated August 16, 2022, which led the appellant to file an appeal before the Tribunal. โ
Key Arguments Presented โ
- Violation of Procedural Timelines: The appellant argued that the OIO was passed beyond the stipulated time frame under Regulation 17(7) of CBLR 2018. โ According to this regulation, the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner of Customs must pass an order of suspension or revocation within 90 days from the date of submission of the Inquiry Report by the Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner of Customs. โ In this case, the Inquiry Report was submitted on March 28, 2022, but the OIO was passed on August 16, 2022โwell beyond the 90-day limit. โ
- Previous Tribunal Orders: The appellant highlighted two previous orders by the Tribunal that set aside similar actions taken by the Revenue authorities. โ These orders demonstrated that the alleged contraventions were not substantiated and that the suspension of the appellant’s license was unjustified. โ
- Compliance with CBLR 2018: The appellant contended that they had fulfilled the requirements under Regulation 10(a), (d), and (e) of CBLR 2018, further challenging the grounds for revocation of their license. โ
Tribunalโs Observations
The Tribunal carefully examined the timeline of events and the provisions of Regulation 17(7) of CBLR 2018. โ It noted that the Inquiry Report was submitted on March 28, 2022, and the OIO was passed on August 16, 2022โmore than 130 days later. โ This was a clear violation of the 90-day time limit prescribed under Regulation 17(7). โ The Tribunal emphasized that the regulation does not provide any saving clause for exceeding this time limit, making the delay a procedural lapse. โ
The Tribunal also acknowledged its previous orders, which had set aside the suspension of the appellant’s license due to delayed action by the Revenue authorities. โ These orders further supported the appellant’s case. โ
Final Decision
In its judgment, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal filed by M/s Chatterji & Co. The Tribunal held that the revocation of the Customs Broker License was invalid due to the procedural lapse in adhering to the time limit under Regulation 17(7) of CBLR 2018. The appellant was deemed eligible for consequential relief as per the law. โ
Key Takeaways
- Adherence to Procedural Timelines: The case underscores the importance of strict compliance with procedural timelines in adjudication processes. โ The Tribunal’s decision serves as a reminder to authorities to ensure timely action to uphold the principles of natural justice. โ
- Significance of Previous Judicial Precedents: The Tribunal’s acknowledgment of its earlier orders highlights the importance of consistency in judicial decisions and the role of precedents in shaping outcomes.
- Protection of Rights Under CBLR 2018: The judgment reinforces the safeguards provided under CBLR 2018 to Customs Brokers, ensuring that their licenses cannot be arbitrarily revoked without following due process.
Conclusion
The CESTAT Kolkata’s decision in this case is a landmark ruling that emphasizes the need for procedural fairness and timely action by adjudicating authorities. It serves as a precedent for similar cases and provides reassurance to Customs Brokers that their rights under CBLR 2018 will be protected. This judgment is a testament to the judiciary’s role in upholding justice and ensuring accountability in administrative processes.
Source: CESTAT Kolkata
Handy Download:
Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com
Tel: +91-11-4999 2707 I +91-9999005379
Leave a Reply