| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2015 SLG 1774 2015 SLD 1774 (1978) 111 TAX 160 2015 PTCL 33 |
Lahore High Court
Custom Ref. Application No. 109/2013, decided 29-10-2014. DATE of hearing: 29-10-2014.
SYED MANSOOR ALI SHAH AND ABID AZIZ SHEIKH, JJ.
Barrister Ahmed Pervaiz, for the Petitioner. Sarfraz Ahmad Cheema, Advocate/legal advisor, for the
Respondent-Customs Department. Barrister Rizwan Ahmed, Advocate/Assistant Legal Advisor of the Ministry, for the
Respondent-Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Custom Ref. Application No. 109/2013, decided 29-10-2014. DATE of hearing: 29-10-2014.
SYED MANSOOR ALI SHAH AND ABID AZIZ SHEIKH, JJ.
Barrister Ahmed Pervaiz, for the Petitioner. Sarfraz Ahmad Cheema, Advocate/legal advisor, for the
Respondent-Customs Department. Barrister Rizwan Ahmed, Advocate/Assistant Legal Advisor of the Ministry, for the
Respondent-Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
WANG XIAOWEI
VS
ASSISTANT COLLECTOR CUSTOMS, FAISALABAD and others
Law: Customs Act, 1969
Section: 15,156,181,196
JUDGMENT The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Abid Aziz Sheikh, J. - Through this Custom Reference filed u/s 196 of the Customs Act, 1969 ("Act"), the petitioner has assailed order dated 04.07.2013 passed by learned Customs Appellate Tribunal, Bench-II, Lahore in Custom Appeal No.177/LB/2012. 2. Brief facts are that a vehicle i.e. Mercedes Benz E240 bearing Chassis No.WDB2110612A05233, Engine No.112913-31-296012, Model 2002 ("vehicle") was imported by the Embassy of People's Republic of China ("Embassy") bearing registration No. LZK-8888 in the year 2002 vide Bill of Entry No.19417, dated 16-8-2002. The vehicle having been imported by a foreign mission was exempt from duties and taxes. The claim of the petitioner is that he is a citizen of China who purchased the vehicle from the Embassy vide Certificate dated 18-09-2006, after more than three years from the date of its import, therefore, no duties and taxes were leviable thereon as per SRO No.577(1)/2006 dated 5-6-2006 ("SRO"). 3. However, on 10-01-2012, the vehicle was not only seized by the Custom Authorities, but vide exparte Order in Original dated 02-05-2012, the same was also confiscated. The petitioner being aggrieved preferred appeal before respondent No.5 who vide Order in Appeal dated 15-8-2012 released the vehicle on payment of redemption fine equal to 20% of the customs value as was determined at the time of import in terms of SRO No.499(1)/2009 dated 13-06-2009. The respondent No.1 filed appeal before the Customs Appellate Tribunal ("Tribunal") which was accepted vide order dated 04-07-2013 and order in appeal dated 15-08-2012 was set aside whereas exparte order in original dated 02-05-2012 was restored. The petitioner has assailed the order of the Tribunal dated 04-07-2013 in the instant reference. 4. Though number of questions of law are raised in the instant reference, however, during the course of proceedings, learned counsel for the petitioner confined his submissions to the following questions of law arising out of the order of the learned Tribunal:- i. Whether the learned Tribunal erred in law by failing to exercise the discretion vested in it under section 18] of the Act in favour 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