Case Details

Citation(s)
2005 SLG 529 2005 SLD 529 2005 PTD 1128
Sindh High Court
Special Customs Appeal No.100 of 2003, decision dated: 17-02-2005
ANWAR ZAHEER, JAMALI, JUSTICE MUHAMMAD MUJEEBULLAH SIDDIQUI, JUSTICE
Taha Alizai for Appellant, Raja Muhammad Iqbal for
Respondents.

PAKISTAN STATE OIL COMPANY LTD

VS

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, KARACHI AND ANOTHER

Law: Customs Act, 1969

Section: 194

Customs Act (IV of 1969)----Ss. 194-B(2) & 196---Appeal to High Court---Rectification of mistake---Scope---Question referred was "whether the rectification application was in substance a review application or a rectification application seeking rectification of a mistake apparent from the record"---Held, prayer in the said application was to modify the order passed by the Tribunal and there was no prayer that there was some mistake floating on the face of record which may be rectified---Finding given by the Tribunal to the effect that in fact, review of the order of the Tribunal was sought through the application and no such jurisdiction had been conferred on the Tribunal, therefore the application was not maintainable, was not open to any exception---Every question of law was not to be admitted for hearing by High Court---Point in issue as in the present case, having stood settled by various s of High Courts as well as Supreme Court, no fresh findings were required on the point as to what was the scope of mistake apparent on record. CIT v. Qureshi Brothers 1986 PTD 100; CIT v. National Food Industries 1992 PTD 570 = 1992 SCMR 687 and Baqar v. Muhammad Rafique 2003 SCMR 140 ref. ORDER This appeal under section 196 of the Customs Act, 1969 is directed against the order, dated 28-5-2002 passed by the learned Customs, Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal Karachi Bench-I, whereby an application under section 194-B(2) of the Customs Act, 1969 was dismissed with finding that a review was sought through the said application, which was not available in law. Although in the memo. of appeal learned counsel for appellant has proposed as many as six questions of law. However, during the course of arguments he has stated that the sole question requiring consideration is, whether the rectification application was in substance a review application or a rectification application seeking rectification of a mistake apparent from the record. Learned counsel for appellant was confronted with the scope of section 194-B(2) of the Customs Act, 1969 and was asked to dilate on the scope of rectification of the mistake apparent from the record. Learned counsel submitted that the…
πŸ”’
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