Commissioner Of Customs (Airport & Admn.) Vs Shipping & Clearing Agents Pvt. Ltd. (Calcutta High Court)
Timeline prescribed under Regulation 20(5) of CBLR Regulations of 2013 are directory: HC
he case of Commissioner Of Customs (Airport & Admn.) Vs Shipping & Clearing Agents Pvt. Ltd. before the Calcutta High Court revolves around the interpretation of Customs Regulation 20 (5) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013. This regulation stipulates the timeframe within which enquiry reports must be filed by customs authorities
The core issue addressed by the High Court was whether the requirement to file an enquiry report within 90 days, as mandated by Regulation 20 (5), is mandatory or directory. The appellant argued that failure to comply with this timeline should invalidate the report, whereas the respondent contended that such timelines are flexible and do not impact the validity of the enquiry report itself. The High Court, in its judgement dated June 8, 2023, analyzed precedents and legal interpretations from various High Courts across India. It found that while there is conflicting jurisprudence on the matter, the weight of authority leans towards treating these timelines as directory rather than mandatory. This conclusion was bolstered by previous decisions from the Madras and Delhi High Courts, which held similar views regarding procedural timelines under customs regulations. The division bench of the Calcutta High Court unanimously held that Regulation 20 (5) timelines are directory in nature. This means that non-compliance with the 90-day period does not automatically render an enquiry report invalid or unusable. Instead, the tribunal or adjudicating authority retains discretion to consider the report based on its merits, regardless of when it was submitted. The court’s decision underscores the principle that procedural timelines should facilitate, rather than hinder, the adjudicative process. By deeming Regulation 20 (5) as directory, the High Court aims to ensure that customs authorities have flexibility in processing cases while upholding due process and fairness.
