| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2011 SLG 928 2011 SLD 928 2011 PTD 2624 |
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue
Customs Appeal No.K-273 of 2008, decision dated: 8-04-2011,hearing DATE : 5-04-2011
MUHAMMAD ARIF MOTON, MEMBER (JUDICIAL-II)MUHAMMAD ARSHAD, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)
Nadeem Ahmed Mirza for Appellant.Ghulam Yasin, Appraiser for
Respondent.
Customs Appeal No.K-273 of 2008, decision dated: 8-04-2011,hearing DATE : 5-04-2011
MUHAMMAD ARIF MOTON, MEMBER (JUDICIAL-II)MUHAMMAD ARSHAD, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)
Nadeem Ahmed Mirza for Appellant.Ghulam Yasin, Appraiser for
Respondent.
MESSRS H.H. BROTHERS, LAHOREVS COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, SALES TAX AND CENTRAL EXCISE (APPEALS), KARACHI
Law: Customs Act, 1969
Section: 25
(a) Customs Act (IV of 1969)--S.25(1)---Customs Rules, 2001, Rr. 109(2) & 437---Customs General Order 12 of 2002, Para 78---Valuation of imported and exported goods--Declared value to be the transaction value---Burden of proof--Importer in the column of GD stating clearly that the import was without L/C, discharged the burden of proof laid down upon him under S.25(1) of the Customs Act, 1969 and R.109 of the Customs Rules,' 2001---For disputing the said value, it was mandated upon the Department to transmit the message under sub-rule (2) of R.109 of Chapter-IX and 437 of sub-chapter-III of Chapter XXI of Customs Rules, 2001 to the importer for transmitting/scanning additional documents for substantiating his declared value---No such exercise was undertaken either by the Appraiser, Principal Appraiser and Collector of Customs as no copy of the transmitted view message had been placed on record by the Collector of Customs to discharge the burden shifted on to the Department---No decision was communicated with grounds as enunciated in sub-rule (3) of R.109 of the Customs Rules, 2001 thus confirming that no cause or reason was available with the Department for disputing the value and the said fact further stood proved front the fact that no evidential invoice as directed in Para 78 of Customs General Order 12/2002 of the period expressed in R.107(a) of the Customs Rules, 2001 was placed before the Appellate Tribunal--Department failed to discharge the onus of establishing that the price declared by the importer of the imported goods was not the transaction value within the meaning of S.25(1) of the Customs Act, 1969. 2005 PTD (Trib.) 617; Messrs Mughal Tobacco Limited v. Collector of Customs 1986 MLD 790; Messrs Kamran Industries v. The Collector of Customs, Exports and 4 others PLD 1996 Karachi 68; Collector of Customs Port Muhammad Bin Qasim v. Zymotic Diagnostic International, Faisalabad 2008. SCMR 438; Collector of Customs (Valuation) and another v. Karachi Bulk Storage and Terminal Ltd. 2007 SCMR 1357 = 2007 PTD 1858; Customs Appeal No. K-249 of 2000/13372;' Customs Appeal No. K-35 of 2002; Customs Appeal No.K-1670 of 2001; Customs Appeal No.K-1281 of…
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