Case Details

Citation(s)
2023 SLG 2107 2023 SLD 2107 2023 SCMR 1247 (2023) 128 TAX 61 2023 PTCL 691
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petitions Nos. 3215, 3644, 3656, 3657 to 3689, 3731 to3732, 3216, 3745 to 3749, 3217, 3634 to 3643, 3645 to 3655,3690 to 3730, 3733 to 3744, 3750 to 3780 of 2021, decided on7th June, 2022. Date of hearing: 7th June, 2022 (Againstthe judgment pas
Present: Umar Ata Bandial, C.J., Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Ayesha A. Malik, JJ
Shafqat Mehmood, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners. Dr. Farhat Zafar, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent.

Mian AZAM WAHEED and 2 others---Petitioners

VS

The COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS through Additional Collector of Customs, Karachi---Respondent

Law: Customs Act, 1969

Section: 25,25A,25D

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 199

(a) Customs Act (IV of 1969)------Ss. 25, 25A & 25D---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Valuation Ruling ('the Ruling') issued by Customs department---Constitutional petition before the High Court challenging such Ruling---Maintainability---Alternate remedy of review under section 25D of the Customs Act, 1969 not availed---Effect---Instead of challenging the Valuation Ruling directly in the High Court, the best course available to the petitioners (importers) was to file a Review Petition against the said Ruling under section 25D of the Customs Act, 1969 which was an appropriate remedy provided under the law in which all factual disputes with regard to the valuation as well as transactional value could be raised, but this statutory remedy was circumvented---Legislature had purposely and consciously provided this remedy under section 25D of the Act to an aggrieved person to assail the Valuation Ruling and, at the same time, it also provides an opportunity to the Director General Valuation to rectify the legal or factual defects, if any, made while issuing the Valuation Ruling---In the present case the impugned Valuation Ruling could not be construed as violative or in contravention of any provision of Customs Act, 1969 for the purposes of challenging it within the domain or realm of Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court, however, the remedy provided under section 25D had its own wide scope and parameters where an aggrieved person may file review petition to challenge the Ruling which was the best available remedy rather than approaching the High Court directly---Writ petitions had been rightly dismissed by the High Court due to lack of jurisdiction---Petitions for leave to appeal were dismissed and leave was refused. (b) Constitution of Pakistan------Art. 199---Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court---Scope---Exhaustion of remedies, doctrine of---Scope---Writ jurisdiction of the High Court cannot be exploited as the sole solution or remedy for ventilating all miseries, distresses and plights regardless of having equally efficacious, alternate and adequate remedy provided under the law which cannot be bypassed to attract the writ…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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