Case Details

Citation(s)
2003 SLG 852 2003 SLD 852 2003 PTD 777
Sindh High Court
Special Custom Appeal No.25 of 2002, decided on. 26-09-2002
MUHAMMAD MUJEEBULLAH SIDDIQUI AND AZIZULLAH M. MEMON, JJ
Aziz A. Shaikh for Appellant. M. Farid-ud-Din for
Respondents

ENGRO CHEMICAL PAKISTAN LTD

VS

ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

Law: Central Excise Act, (I of 1944)

Section: 36

(Central Excises Act (I of 1944)]......Ss 36-C---Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990), Ss. 46 & 47---Customs Act (IV of 1969), Ss. 196---Appeal/reference before High Court-­Scope---Failure of Tribunal to pass proper speaking order by considering all questions of facts and law raised by the parties---Effect---Tribunal a final forum for deciding facts---Scope of appeal before High Court limited to questions of law arising out of order of Tribunal---Disposal of appeal by Tribunal by a summary and slipshod order deprecated---Every judicial order should be a speaking order---Failure of Tribunal to pass proper judicial order by considering all questions of facts and law raised before it would amount to negation of justice as in such case High Court would not be able to decide questions of law. (b) Administration of justice--- ---- Every judicial order should be a speaking order. ORDER In this appeal under section 36-C of Central Excises Act, 1944, the following questions of law have been proposed by the appellant: "(1) Whether learned CEAST has misapplied the Special Procedure for collection of CE duty on supply and distribution of gas prescribed under Rule 96 ZZO of CE Rules 1944? (2) Whether learned CEAST has acted contrary to provision of section 3(1) of the CE Act, 1944 read with heading 9817.0000 of S.R.O. 456(I)796, dated 13-6-1996 by changing character of appellant as consumer to as producer/manufacturer merely of gas supplies to its labour colony? (3) Whether proceeding impugned initiated on 31-5-1999 for transactions concluded during November, 1996 to June, 1998 is barred by time under Rule 10(1) of CE Rules, 1944 read with S.R.O. 539(I)/94, dated 9-4-1994?" A perusal of the impugned order, with the assistance of learned Advocates shows that, the points sought to be raised before us have not been decided by the learned Tribunal. Mr. Aziz A. Shaikh, learned counsel for the appellant has shown us the grounds of appeal, raised before the Tribunal and has contended that, all these points were raised before the Tribunal but the learned Members of the Tribunal disposed of the appeal by a slipshod order, without considering all the facts and points of law raised before…
🔒
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