| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2019 SLG 2232 2019 SLD 2232 2019 PLJ 57 |
Lahore High Court
Custom Ref. No. 244991 of 2018, decision & hearing Dated: 04.12.2018.
SHAHID, JAMIL KHAN, JUSTICE ASIM HAFEEZ, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Mr. Sumair Saeed Ahmad, Advocate
Respondent(s) by: Mr. Nadeem Mehmood Mian, Advocate
Custom Ref. No. 244991 of 2018, decision & hearing Dated: 04.12.2018.
SHAHID, JAMIL KHAN, JUSTICE ASIM HAFEEZ, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Mr. Sumair Saeed Ahmad, Advocate
Respondent(s) by: Mr. Nadeem Mehmood Mian, Advocate
M/S. ROSHAN PACKAGES LTD. THROUGH CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
VS
CUSTOMS APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AND 3 OTHERS
Law: Customs Act, 1969
Section: 196,196(5)
Law: Customs Rules, 2001
Section: 303,304
Customs Act, 1969 (IV of 1969)-- ----S. 196--Custom appellate tribunal--Rectification--Allegation of illegal sale of imported papers--Question of identification of stocks/missing items--Validity--Court while exercising jurisdiction under Section 196 of Customs Act, 1969 cannot dwell into fact finding exercise by examining findings of fact recorded by Appellate Tribunal. The shortfall, non-availability of requisite stock/item and issues relating to site inspection/verifications are purely factual in nature--In circumstances, we find that no question of law is arising out of order of Appellate Tribunal, which order otherwise does not suffer from any legal infirmity--Application was dismissed. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: ASIM HAFEEZ, JUSTICE---.---- This order shall also decide Reference Application No. 244992 of 2018 which was filed seeking rectification of order dated 03.04.2018, impugned through instant reference application, which rectification application was dismissed vide order dated 28.09.2018. The applicant has impugned judgment dated 03.04.2018 passed by Customs Appellate Tribunal, Lahore ("Appellate Tribunal") whereby the appeal filed by the applicant was dismissed upholding the order-in-original dated 03.10.2016. 2. The precise issue involved is the failure of applicant to satisfy department that the items imported, under DTRE regime, were consumed for manufacturing purposes only. It is pertinent to mention that respondent claimed to be an indirect exporter in terms of DTRE regime, who was Obliged to consume the imported raw material for manufacturing purposes only. 3. Various questions of law were proposed, statedly arising out of the order of Appellate Tribunal, for our opinion, however, the applicant emphasized following question of law:-- i) Whether the learned Appellate Tribunal has erred in law by passing an order based on misapplication of law, as the exports made by the applicant under the DTRE scheme have never been objected. No provision under the Act or the Rules made thereunder including Rules 303 and 304 of the Customs Rules, 2001, debar the DTRE user from procuring duty and taxes paid goods for consumption under DTRE for Exports. Rather Section…
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