Case Details

Citation(s)
2004 SLG 766 2004 SLD 766 2004 PTD 1944
Sindh High Court
Spl. Custom Appeal No. 26 of 2000, decision dated: 13-04-2002, hearing DATE : 4-04-2002.
ATA-UR-REHMAN, JUSTICE SARMAD, JALAL OSMANY, JUSTICE
Sattar Silat for Appellant. Raja Muhammad Iqbal for
Respondent.

MESSRS UNIVERSAL BUSINESS EQUIPMENT (PVT.) LIMITED THROUGH CHIEF EXECUTIV

VS

DEPUTY COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, CUSTOMS HOUSE, KARACHI AND ANOTHER

Law: Customs Act, 1969

Section: 196

(a) Customs Act (IV of 1969)---S. 196---Appeal---Questions formulated being questions of fact related to issue, whether subject machines were in fact typewriter or type-setting machines---Order-in-original and appellate order had dealt with such aspect of matter by concluding that such machines could be used as type-writer as well---High Court dismissed appeal by, refusing to interfere in such matter. (b) Limitation--- ---- Issue of limitation could be agitated before any forum including Supreme Court, although same had not been agitated before any of lower Courts. Messrs Faran Enterprises v. The Appellate Tribunal, Customs, Excise and Sales Tax 1999 CLC, 735 and Messrs Baba Khan v. Collector of Customs, Quetta 2000 SCMR 678 ref. (c) Administration of Justice----- ----Legal issues, which are specifically not pleaded before any judicial forum, can be taken up and decided by higher forum, since a duty is cast upon such forum to take notice of such legal issues itself. (d) Customs Act (IV of 1969)----- ----Ss. 32(2)(3) & 196--Issuance of show-cause notice ---Limitation--­Goods were released on 16-7-1987---Show-cause notice was issued on 4-2-1988---Tribunal was of view that case of importer was not of intentional mis declaration or concealment of facts so as to attract provision of S.32(2) of Customs Act, 1969, rather same was a case falling under S.32(3) thereof---High Court remanded case to Tribunal to consider, whether show-cause notice issued on 4-2-1988 was within time or not. JUDGMENT SARMAD JALAL OSMANY, J.---The questions of law as raised in this appeal are as follows:-- (1.1)Whether the respondent No.1 having physically not only examined the goods imported by the appellant but also having been satisfied though practical demonstration through the following observations as incorporated in the relevant file of the respondent bearing No.SI/Misc/610/87-VI:-- "Basically the work of the this apparatus is typesetting, therefore, it ought to be assessed under 874.34." (Sd.) D.C. 1, . 15-7-1987" The subsequent show-cause notices, dated 4-2-1988 are maintainable? The Appellant respectfully prays for an answer in negative. (1.2) Whether the respondent No.1 in view…
🔒
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