Case Details

Citation(s)
2015 SLG 1679 2015 SLD 1679 2015 PTD 570 2015 PTCL 107 (2015) 111 TAX 344
Peshawar High Court
Custom Reference No.26 of 2010, decision dated: 20-11-2014,hearing DATE : 20-11-2014.
YAHYA AFRIDI AND HAIDER ALI KHAN, JJ
Ajoon Khan for Petitioner. Muhammad Ali for
Respondents.

SULTAN MUHAMMADVs.COLLECTOR CUSTOMS and another

Law: Customs Act, 1969

Section: 6,7,17,156,193,194-A,196

Law: Customs Act, 1969

Section: 6,7,17,156,193,194-A,196

Law: Provincial Motor Vehicles Ordinance (XIX of 1965)

Section: 33

(a) Customs Act (IV of 1969)---Ss. 17, 156, 193, 194-A & 196---Detention and confiscation of vehicles---Reference to High Court---In the present case, vehicles were either smuggled ones or their certificate of registration, and bill of entry were suspected to be forged---Such vehicles were detained and were got examined through Forensic Science Laboratory---Chemical Examiner's report had confirmed that original chassis of the vehicles had been cut at the site of the chassis number, and another metallic piece had been welded---In view of said report, vehicles were detained and confiscated---Appeals filed against said confiscation, was dismissed by Appellate Authority---Appellate Tribunal upheld the order of confiscation---High Court declined interference and answered the Reference in negative. (b) Customs Act (IV of 1969)--- ----Ss. 6, 7 & 17---Provincial Motor Vehicles Ordinance (XIX of 1965), S.33---Detention and confiscation of vehicle having tampered chassis number---Procedure---Manipulation of the chassis number of the vehicle, including the cutting of chassis plate, the removal thereof and welding another piece having the chassis number thereon was confirmed by the Forensic Science Laboratory and amounted to "tampering", especially, when owner was unable to explain and justify the said manipulation of the chassis number---Revenue, was only authorized to seize and confiscate the vehicles, which were non-duty paid---Presumption of truth was attached to the report of Forensic Science Laboratory being a result of an official act---In case serious infirmities appeared on record, which cast reasonable doubt on the presumption of truth attached to Forensic Science Laboratory report, evidence could be recorded of the official, who carried out the Forensic Science Examination---Law did not require the "Maker" of the report to be summoned and cross-examined by the owner of vehicle---Tampering of chassis number as a result of an accident of vehicle, could only be a valid ground, if same was reported and confirmed by Motor Vehicles Authority under S.33 of the Provincial Motor Vehicles Ordinance, 1965---Public auction of vehicles with tampered chassis, was…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register