Law: Customs Act, 1969

Section: 19

Respondents Nos.3 and 4. Customs Act (IV of 1969)--S.19-SRO No. 575(I)/2006, dated 05-06-2006-General power to exempt from customs duties-Scope-Petitioner sought benefit of SRO No. 575(I)/2006, dated 05-06-2006-Petitioner being a pharmaceutical company had manufactured certain drugs for which customized Air Handling Units (AHUs) were required to control temperature, humidity and pressure level-As per the understanding of petitioner the AHUs required by it were not locally manufactured-Petitioner had imported the AHUs at which it sought the benefit of the SRO No. 575(I)/2006, dated 05-06-2006, which was denied-Contention of authorities was that the local manufacturers had the capacity to manufacture the required AHUs-Validity-Authorities had admitted that no physical verification was made to ascertain the statements of local manufacturers, who had claimed that they had the capacity to make the AHU required by the petitioner-AHU required by the petitioner was a customized product with certain specific components-Authorities were required to certify that a particular product was locally manufactured and in doing so it had to understand the requirements of the petitioner-Constitutional petition was accepted, authorities were directed to provide certificate to the petitioner that the product was not locally manufactured and the customs authorities were directed to grant the benefit of the SRO No.575(I)/2006, dated 05-06-2006 to the petitioner in terms thereof. JUDGMENT AYESHA A. MALIK, JUSTICE:---.--- This single judgment decides upon the issues raised in W.P.Nos.13728 and 12697 of 2011 and Crl. Org.No.660-W of 2013 as common questions of law and fact arise in these petitions. 2. The Petitioner is a pharmaceutical company and has prayed that it be granted the benefit of SRO 575(I)/2006 (“SRO”) dated 05.06.2006 and that letters issued by Engineering Development Board Respondent No.3 dated 17.02.2011, 25.02.2011 and 09.06.2011 be declared illegal and unlawful having no legal effect against the Petitioner. 3. The case of the Petitioner is that it is engaged in the business of manufacturing, selling and distribution of pharmaceuticals drugs and other ancillary products.…

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