Law: Customs Act, 1969

Section: 2(kka),25,25(1),25A,32,32(1),32A,79,79(1 ),156(1),156(14),180

Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

Section: 148,162(1)

Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990

Section: 11,33

Law: Customs Rules, 2001

Section: 433

(a) Customs Act (IV of 1969)--- ----Ss. 32, 32-A, 79 & 180---Show-cause notice---Preparation, issuance and scope---Show-cause notice, was a vital basic document, which was to be prepared with utmost care after going through the provisions of the Act/Ordinance---Cosmetic show-cause notice was not a legal document---Authority, issuing show-cause notice after the establishment of charge, was to carefully go through the facts of the case and applicable provisions of the Act alleged to be contravened and the penal clauses attracted----Decision on any fresh ground, which was not spelled out in the show-cause notice, was not permitted---Provisions of law which were not applicable and were invoked, would render the show-cause notice palpably illegal---Proceedings before Adjudicating Officer, were in the nature of quasi judicial proceedings and issuance of notice under S.180 of the Customs Act, 1969, was very important document---Decision to issue show-cause notice, was to be taken by the Collector Adjudication, by application of independent mind and not merely signing the draft show-cause notice submitted by the Investigation Agency, separate from the Adjudication Department---Each category of officers were required to perform their respective functions/duties under the law---Practice to submit draft show-cause notice by the Director General of Intelligence and Investigation to the Collector Adjudication was depreciated---While passing order-in-original/appeal, it was mandated upon the adjudicating authority to examine the charter of show-cause notice and remain within its ambit---Where order so passed was beyond the charter of the show-cause notice, same would be deemed to be illegal---Appellate Tribunal, in such a situation would have no after option but to declare the notice to be suffering from legal infirmity and void. Messrs Zeb Traders v. Federation of Pakistan 2004 PTD 369; Asst. Collector v. Khyber Elec. Lamps 2003 PTD 1275; D.G. Khan Cement v. Collector of Customs 2005 PTD 480; Caltex v Collector 2003 PTD 1593; Union Playing Card Company v. Collector of Customs 2002 MLD 130; Atlas Tyres v. Addl. Collector 2002 MLD 180; State Cement v. Collector PTCL 2001…

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