| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2016 SLG 725 2016 SLD 725 2016 PTD 1305 |
Customs Appellate Tribunal
Customs Appeal No. K-445 of 2014, decided on 16th December,2015. Date of hearing: 9th February, 2015.
MUHAMMAD NADEEM QURESHI MEMBER (JUDICIAL-I) AND MUHAMMAD YAHYA MEMBER (TECHNICAL-I)
Nadeem Ahmed Mirza, Consultant along with Obayd Mirza for Appellants.Riaz Hyder, P.A. for
Respondent No. 1.Abdul Rasheed Khan, Appraiser for
Respondent No. 2.
Customs Appeal No. K-445 of 2014, decided on 16th December,2015. Date of hearing: 9th February, 2015.
MUHAMMAD NADEEM QURESHI MEMBER (JUDICIAL-I) AND MUHAMMAD YAHYA MEMBER (TECHNICAL-I)
Nadeem Ahmed Mirza, Consultant along with Obayd Mirza for Appellants.Riaz Hyder, P.A. for
Respondent No. 1.Abdul Rasheed Khan, Appraiser for
Respondent No. 2.
Messrs A.F.U. INTERNATIONAL, KARACHIVSDIRECTOR GENERAL and another
Law: Customs Act, 1969
Section: 25,25D,81,25(7),25(9),25(10),25(15),25A, 25A(1)
Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990
Section: 46(g)
Law: Customs Rules, 2001
Section: 107,108,112
Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001
Section: 148(9)
(a) Customs Act (IV of 1969)--- ----S. 25-A---Income Tax Ordinance (XLV of 2001), S.148(9)---Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990), S.46(g)---Import of goods---Customs value, determination of---Directorate General of Valuation, powers of---In terms of S.46(g) of Sales Tax Act, 1990, Director, Directorate of General Valuation was not empowered to fix the value of imported goods through valuation ruling in exercise of power vested under S.25A(1) of Customs Act, 1969 as it was for the Federal Board of Revenue to issue a notification---Similarly, for determination of value of goods for levy/collection of Income Tax at import stage, the Director, Directorate General of Valuation was not empowered as evident form the expression of S.148(9) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, rendering the determination of value for levy of Sales Tax and Income Tax under S.25A(1) of Customs Act, 1969 without power/jurisdiction---Determination of value for levy/collection of Sales Tax and Income Tax at import stage by Director, Directorate General of Valuation was coram non judice, null and void and of no legal effect---Mandatory condition for exercise of jurisdiction if the same was not fulfilled, then entire proceeding which followed became illegal and suffered from want of jurisdiction. Mansab Ali's case PLD 1971 SC 124; Chittaranjan Cotton Mills Ltd. v. Staff Union PLD 1971 SC 197; Kwami Asante, Treahon v. Chief Kwame Tawia PLD 1973 SC 236 and Shahid Impex v. Director General of Valuation 2014 PTD (Trib.) 675 rel. (b) Customs Act (IV of 1969)--- ----Ss. 25, 25(10) & 25(15)---Value of imported and exported goods, determination of---Scope---Provisions of S.25 of Customs Act, 1969 were to be followed in sequential manner baring certain exceptional cases where massive group under-invoices was rampant, however, resort to subsequent method was not permissible without exhausting the sequence indicated in S.25 of Customs Act, 1969 as it would annihilate and terminate the spirit and essence of transaction value which in the first instance had to be established as colourable and tainted---Mere insertion of word "may" or "may not" in place of "are required to" in S.25(15) of Customs Act, 1969 through…