Law: Customs Act, 1969

Section: 156

Law: Constitution of Pakistan

Section: 77, 199

(a) Customs Act (IV of 1969) S. 156 [as amended by Finance Act, 2023]---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 77 & 199---Constitutional petition---Amendment, vires of---Fiscal matters---Legislative competency---Judicial review---Scope---Petitioner assailed vires of amendment introduced through Finance Act, 2023, whereby S.156 of Customs Act, 1969 was amended and minimum quantum of penalty for release of certain goods was enhanced---Validity---Question of legislative competence in fiscal matters must be examined within Constitutional framework that governs distribution and exercise of taxing powers in Pakistan---Constitution does not treat taxation as an incidental authority; rather, recognizes it as an essential attribute of sovereignty, subject only to Constitutional limitations---Fiscal and economic regulation lies within policy domain of the Legislature---Determination of rate, structure, and deterrent effect of penalties involves complex considerations of public interest, revenue protection, and regulatory discipline---Judicial review does not extend to reassessing wisdom or severity of such measures, so long as they are enacted within Constitutional competence and do not infringe specific Constitutional prohibition---Comprehensive appellate framework has been provided in Customs Act, 1969 against adjudication orders, including those relating to penalty---Petitioners had the opportunity to contest imposition and application of amended provision before competent authority and, if aggrieved, to pursue appeals provided by law---Statutory forum was fully competent to interpret amended provision, examine its applicability to the cases of petitioners and determine the extent of liability---By directly invoking Art. 199 of the Constitution, petitioner had sought to bypass such structured mechanism---In the absence of circumstances demonstrating that statutory remedy was inadequate, inefficacious, or illusory or that action in question was patently without jurisdiction, High Court would be slow to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction---Principle that Constitutional relief was not available where an adequate alternate remedy existed was not merely procedural, it…