| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2025 SLG 4735 2025 SLD 4735 = 2025 SCP 408 = 2026 SCMR 652 |
Civil Petition No. 1277-K of 2022 [Against order dated 08.11.2022 of the High Court of Sindh, Karachi passed in C.P.No. D-5641/2022]
Present: Mr. Justice Yahya Afridi, CJ Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui Mr. Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb
MUHAMMAD KHALIL DOGAR ACS
The Collector of Customs, Collectorate of Customs Appraisement, Karachi. … Petitioner
VERSUS
M/s M.M. Steel, Sialkot and another. … Respondents
Law: Customs Act, 1969
Section: 27A
Law: Customs Rules, 2001
Section: 592
Summary of the Order
Statutory Law Analysis
The order examines the application of Section 27A of the Customs Act, 1969, and Rule 592 of the Customs Rules, 2001. These legal provisions govern the procedures for mutilation or scrapping of imported goods. Under the current framework:
- Section 27A of the Customs Act, 1969 allows for the mutilation or scrapping of goods, but only those which have been specifically notified by the Board.
- Rule 592 of the Customs Rules, 2001 contains a restrictive list of eligible items (such as pipes, rods, beams, ship plates, foils, tyres, certain vehicle cabins, and approved industrial inputs).
- Machine rollers—the subject of the disputed consignment—are not included in this list, regardless of whether they are serviceable or unserviceable.
- The department’s refusal to allow the mutilation was based on the absence of “rollers” from the list. The importer also did not obtain an analysis certificate for approval as an industrial input.
The statutory framework establishes a closed list, demonstrating clear legislative intent to limit the mutilation/scrapping procedure only to specified goods. Judicial or administrative authorities cannot broaden this list without legislative or regulatory amendment.
Case Law Analysis
The primary judicial determination in this order confirms that: