Case Details

Citation(s)
2002 SLG 823 2002 SLD 823 2002 PTCL 427
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue
Appeals Nos. 2506, 2505, 2499, 2496, 2504, 2554, 2497, 2427, 2426, 2432, 2436, 2463, 2494, 2565, 2500, .......16.05.2002
MR., JUSTICE (R) ABDUL MAJEED TIWANA, CHAIRMAN/MEMBER (JUDICIAL) MR. SARFRAZ AHMAD KHAN, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)
Appellants by: Mian Abdul Ghaffar, and Rana Sardar Ali and Mr. Muhammad Akram Nizami, Advocates. Mr. Amer Ahmed, D.R., Mr. Rahat Pirzada, D.S., Mr. Mubarak Ali Sherazi, I.0. and Mr. Akhtar Zaidi, Inspector

MUHAMMAD RAMZAN and others

VS

DEPARTMENT OF CUSTOMS

Law: Customs Act, 1969

Section: 181

CUSTOMS ACT, 1969 (IV OF 1969)---Section 181---The "one time amnesty to smuggled vehicles" was announced by CBR on 16.12.1999 but the said exclusion of vehicles from the category of the smuggled goods at Sr. No. 1 of Table-I of SRO. 1374(I)/98 is there since 12.6.1999. This exclusion of vehicles from the category of smuggled goods cannot be linked with the "one time amnesty to smuggled vehicles" announced by CBR on 16.12.1999. The vehicles in question therefore can be released to the appellants on payment of fine equal to 100%.--Vehicles were seized by the customs authorities from each of the appellant on different dates and at different places on the ground that those were non duty paid/smuggled. Show cause notices were issued to the appellants on different dates by the adjudicating officers who vide their respective separate orders ordered for the outright confiscation of the vehicles under the relevant provisions of the Customs Act, 1969 and did not allow the appellants, despite their pleading, to redeem the vehicles on payment of fine in lieu of confiscation alongwith duty/taxes payable under the law in view of the operation of SRO. 1374(I)/98, dated 17.12.98, particularly clause (a) read with table-I of the SRO. The contention of the learned DR is that the existing entry at Sr. No. 4 of Table-Ill related only to the amnesty period and those who paid duty/taxes upto 15th March, 2000 availed the amnesty and thereafter this entry was no more relevant. His contention is correct to the extent that such vehicles as specified at Sr. No. 4 of Table-III in respect of which duty/taxes were paid by 15th March, 2000 were not to suffer any fine in lieu of confiscation. But we do not find ourselves in agreement with this part of his contention that after 15.3.2000, where duty/taxes were not paid, the main entry at Sr. No. 4 has become redundant. The interpretation adopted by the learned D.R. is in itself full of contradictions e.g. what is the implication of exclusion of "goods mentioned in Sr. No. 4 of Table-III" from the smuggled category specified at Sr. No. 1 of Table-I of SRO. 1374(I)/98 upto 15.3.2000 only despite the fact that vehicles remained listed in the list…
🔒
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