Case Details

Citation(s)
2011 SLG 943 2011 SLD 943 2011 PTD 1406
Federal Tax Ombudsman
Complaint No.206/Isd/Cus(23)/785 of 2009, decision dated: 31st March, 2010
DR. MUHAMMAD SHOAIB SUDDLE, FEDERAL TAX OMBUDSMAN
Yasin Tahir, Senior Advisor, Dealing Officer.

ASIF SIDDIQ

VS

SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD

Law: Customs Act, 1969

Section: 25

Customs Act (IV of 1969)--Ss. 25, 44, 48 & 216---Establishment of Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXXV of 2000), Ss. 9 & 10---Complaint case---Allegation of maladministration and embezzlement of imported goods---Submission of the complainant was that he established two letters of credit for import of 60-M Ton Urea Formaldehyde and 60-M Tons of Glazing Powder from China---Complainant received information regarding arrival of goods---Complainant checked up the whereabouts of his consignments and he was informed that goods had already been cleared by the consignees/Clearing and Forwarding Agents and goods were transported to address of one who was brother-in-law of the complainant---Complainant had implicated a number of persons and agencies, public and private in the complaint of maladministration and embezzlement---As the jurisdiction of the Federal Tax Ombudsman extended only to the maladministration of tax employees, investigation was focused on alleged maladministration of the Customs func-tionaries---Submissions of the parties and the witnesses raised a number of questions and complainant was confronted with questions related to him---As to lack of anxiety of complainant to retire Bank documents to clear his goods earlier, complainant simply stated that he thought he would clear the consignments after reopening of Dry Port after winter season---Such explanation was not plausible---Facts of the case had established that a big fraud had been perpetrated by brother-in-law of the complainant---Conduct of the complainant had spoken volumes about his active connivance with his brother-in-law, because without his nod, the suppliers in China could not change the mode of transport and name of the consignees---Complainant's failure to protest against those violations of his contract and the L.C's, by the shippers in China betrayed his complicity---Such a fraud could not have happened without the connivance of brother-in-law of the complainant and collusion of the customs and Dry Port Authorities---Ombudsman recommended that Federal Board of Revenue, to conduct thorough investigation into the case in co-ordination with the concerned agencies and…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492