Law: Customs Act, 1969

Section: 32

(a) Customs Act (IV of 1969)--- ----S.32---Mis-declaration---Scope---Department assailed order passed by Appellate Tribunal whereby it was held that a mere difference of opinion between the declared PCT Heading and the ascertained PCT Heading did not automatically constitute the offence of mis-declaration entailing penal consequences---Validity---Misconstruction or erroneous interpretation in respect of a relevant notification did not per se amount to a false declaration in terms of the Customs Act, 1969---Comparison of the two PCT Headings in the present case demonstrated that they were fairly akin and it appeared that the claimed PCT Heading had admittedly been accepted/allowed by the department for treatment of similar goods in the past---Decision arrived at on the question under scrutiny was unexceptionable and required no interference by the High Court---Reference application was decided against the department. 2011 PTD 1460; 2011 PTD 476; 2013 PTD 1420; State Cement Corporation v. Collector of Customs and another 2002 MLD 180; Collector of Customs v. Shaikh Shakeel Ahmed 2011 PTD 495 and Collector of Customs Karachi v. Messrs Power Electronics Pakistan (Pvt.) Ltd. Lahore 2011 PTD 2837 ref. (b) Customs Act (IV of 1969)--- ----S.32---Mis-declaration---Scope---Where wrong interpretation of a section is made and duty is paid predicted upon such erroneous interpretation in good faith, the same may not be deemed to be a mis-declaration. Collector of Customs v. Shaikh Shakeel Ahmed 2011 PTD 495 ref. JUDGMENT AGHA FAISAL, JUSTICE:---.--- This reference application was preferred under section 196 of the Customs Act, 1969 (Act) with respect to judgment dated 20.03.2015 rendered in Customs Appeal K-1673 of 2014 by the learned Customs Appellate Tribunal (Impugned Judgment). 2. Briefly stated, the respondent, being a manufacturer of motorcycles, had imported specialized power cable for its new factory project and the same was assessed for duty under an HS Code1 other than that sought by the respondent. The departmental adjudication proceedings culminated in the Impugned Judgment, whereby it was held that a mere difference of opinion between the declared PCT heading…

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