| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2023 SLG 2516 2023 SLD 2516 = (2023) 127 TAX 834 = = 2025 PTD 377 |
Sindh High Court
SCR 502 of 2016 decided on 15.03.2021, date of hearing:15.03.2021
PRESENT: MUHAMMAD JUNAID GHAFFAR AND AGHA FAISAL, JJ.
Mr. Shakeel Ahmed Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. Aamir Ali Advocate for the
Respondent.
SCR 502 of 2016 decided on 15.03.2021, date of hearing:15.03.2021
PRESENT: MUHAMMAD JUNAID GHAFFAR AND AGHA FAISAL, JJ.
Mr. Shakeel Ahmed Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. Aamir Ali Advocate for the
Respondent.
THE COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS
VS
POWER LINK PETROLEUM SERVICES & ANOTHER
Law: Customs Act, 1969
Section: 187
Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)
Section: 117,119,121
CUSTOMS ACT, 1969 (IV OF 1969)----Section: 187 - Qanoon-e-Shahadat Order 1984, Articles: 117, 119 & 121 -Burden of proof as to lawful authority etc: - Distributer of Hascol Petroleum Limited - Purchase of High Speed Diesel - Show Cause Notice - Vacation of Show cause notice by the adjudicating authority - Order set aside in appeal -Appellate Tribunal allowed the impugned order - Validity - Reference to High Court - FACTSThrough this reference application the applicant has impugned the order dated 13.05.2016, passed by the Customs Appellate Tribunal, Karachi in Customs Appeal No.H-815 of 2015.ARGUMENTSLearned counsel for the applicant has read out the impugned order and submits that the Appellate Tribunal has not appreciated the facts and has passed the impugned order, which is not sustainable in law.On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent has supported the impugned order.DECISIONNo question of law arises out of order of appellate Tribunal - Petition dismissed - After perusal of the record, we are of the view that no question of law arises out of order in question inasmuch as the facts stood determined at the adjudication level, when confirmation was sought from Hascol Petroleum Limited and in presence of such confirmation it is not borne uncontroverted. In view if such position, we do not interfere in the impugned order. This reference application is misconceived, hence dismissed.Cases Referred to:Deputy Collector of Customs, Sales Tax and Central Excise (Adjudication) Quetta at Hyderabad Vs. Nak Muhammad and others (C.A # 1585 of 2006) and Collector of Customs Peshawar and others Vs. Zarshad and others (2006, SCMR 973).JUDGMENT:MUHAMMAD JUNAID GHAFAR, JUSTICE:---.---Through this reference application the applicant has impugned the order dated 13.05.2016, passed by the Customs Appellate Tribunal, Karachi in Customs Appeal No.H-815 of 2015, proposing the following questions of law:a) �Whether the Hon�ble Customs Appellate Tribunal misconstrued the true spirit of section 2(s) of the Customs Act, 1969, read with section 3(1) of Import and Export Control Act 1950 and the notification SRO 499(I)/2009, whereby, the legislature has clearly…