| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2017 SLG 1577 2017 SLD 1577 2017 PTD 2474 |
Sindh High Court
S.C.R.A No. 2807 and C.M.A. No. 6305 of 2015, decision Date : 22-09-2016
AQEEL AHMED ABBASI, JUSTICE, ABDUL MAALIK GADDI, JUSTICE
Iqbal Khurram for Applicant. Ghulam Ahmed Khan for
Respondent. Muhammad Javed K.K., Standing Counsel for
Respondent.
S.C.R.A No. 2807 and C.M.A. No. 6305 of 2015, decision Date : 22-09-2016
AQEEL AHMED ABBASI, JUSTICE, ABDUL MAALIK GADDI, JUSTICE
Iqbal Khurram for Applicant. Ghulam Ahmed Khan for
Respondent. Muhammad Javed K.K., Standing Counsel for
Respondent.
THE COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS THROUGH ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR (LAW)
VS
M/S. FACO INDUSTRIES
Law: Customs Act, 1969
Section: 32,32(1)(2),80,81,81(1),81(2),81(4),179, 196
Customs Act (IV of 1969)- -Ss. 32, 80, 81(4) & 196-Assessment of duty-Mis-declaration- Reference to High Court-Classification and description of the consignment-Importer had declared the goods under PCT 7220.9090, whereas, the same had been assessed by the department under PCT 7220.9010-Difference of 5% additional value between declared and assessed value under respective PCT headings-Consignment was physically examined by the department and same was found as per the declaration-No case of mis-declaration was made out-Department had disputed the classification of goods-Provisional assessment having not been finalized by the department which reflected that in terms of subsection (4) of S.81 of the Customs Act, 1969, the provisional determination as per goods declaration, stood finalized-No case of mis-declaration having been established by the department, no justification existed for imposing any redemption fine, or penalty upon the importer when there was no evasion or even difference of duty and taxes in the case-Impugned order passed by the Customs Appellate Tribunal, did not suffer from any error or illegality; whereas it was based on finding of facts, which was neither perverse nor suffering from mis-reading or non-reading of the evidence, but it depicted correct legal position-Reference application, being devoid of any merits, was dismissed, in circumstances. Messrs Salman Tin Merchant, Karachi v. Collector of Customs, Karachi 2014 PTD 438 and 2011 PTD 79 ref. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: AQEEL AHMED ABBASI, JUSTICE:---.--- Through instant reference application, the applicant department initially proposed four questions, however, after having read out the questions and the impugned order passed by the Customs Appellate Tribunal, Karachi Bench-I, in Customs Appeal No.K-785 of 2014, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant pressed only first two questions, which according to learned counsel, are questions of law arising from the impugned order dated 05.06.2015 passed by the Customs Appellate Tribunal, Karachi Bench-1, in the instant case, which read as follows:- (i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the imported goods i.e.…
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