| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2024 SLG 243 2024 SLD 243 (2024) 129 TAX 213 2024 PTD 591 |
Lahore High Court
Customs Reference No.57848 and 57846 of 2023, decided on 12.10.2023, date of hearing: 12.10.2023
PRESENT: MUHAMMAD SAJIDMEHMOOD SETHI AND ASIM HAFEEZ, JJ.
Mr. Omar Arshad Hakeem, Advocate for the Applicant. Ms. Kausar Parveen, Advocate for Customs Department.
Customs Reference No.57848 and 57846 of 2023, decided on 12.10.2023, date of hearing: 12.10.2023
PRESENT: MUHAMMAD SAJIDMEHMOOD SETHI AND ASIM HAFEEZ, JJ.
Mr. Omar Arshad Hakeem, Advocate for the Applicant. Ms. Kausar Parveen, Advocate for Customs Department.
M/S RESHMA TEXTILE MILLS LTD
VS
CUSTOMS APPELLATE TRIBUNAL THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN LAHORE ETC.
Law: Customs Act, 1969
Section: 30(b),32,32(1),79,104,109,156(1)
CUSTOMS ACT, 1969 (IV OF 1969)---Sections: 30(b), 32, 32(1), 79, 104, 109 & Clause 14 of Section: 156(1) - False statement, error, etc:- Date of determination of rate of import duty - Declaration and assessment for home consumption - Clearance of bonded goods for home consumption - Re-assessment on alteration of duty - Punishment for offences - Import of goods - Making false declaration for in bonding of goods in terms of Section 79 - Imposition of penalty in lieu of misdeclaration of PCT Heading - Reference to High court - Validity - FACTS This and connected Customs Reference Application No.57846/2023 are directed against common judgment dated 26.07.2023, of Customs Appellate Tribunal Bench Lahore. Following question of law is proposed for determination, Whether the learned bench failed to appreciate that no penal consequences could be invoked against the applicant or its agent in absence of constitution of offence of misdeclaration under Section 32 of the Customs Act, 1969? ARGUMENTS Learned counsel for Applicant Company (Applicant) submits that mere declaration qua particulars of imported goods for in-bonding of goods does not constitute offence in terms of section 32 of the Customs Act 1969. Adds that question of determination of duties would arise at the time of clearance of goods at the time of ex-bonding. Learned counsel referred to section 30(b), read with section 104 of the Customs Act 1969 to elucidate time of determination of duties. Conversely, learned counsel for respondent department submits that incorrect particulars, regarding identity of the goods in terms of PCT Heading, were disclosed to prejudice determination/assessment of duties. Adds that declaration made in terms of section 79 of Customs Act 1969, wherein misdeclaration was made, attracts mischief of section 32 of Customs Act, 1969. Adds that only penalty was imposed in lieu of misclassification of PCT Heading and no claim regarding assessment of duties and payment thereof was raised. DECISION (a) Wrong declaration constitutes an offence u/s 32 - The declaration submitted/statement made, when found wrong, constitutes an offence under section 32 of Customs Act 1969. A person can be…
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