| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2003 SLG 788 2003 SLD 788 2003 CLD 917 |
Sindh High Court
Constitutional Petitions Nos. D-1051, D-2069, D-2070, D-2680, D-2681, D-2682, D-2683, D-2684,D-2085, D-2975, 541, D-1736 and D-1745 of 2000, decision dated: 30-01-2003
S. AHMED SARWANA, JUSTICE MUHAMMAD MUJEEBULLAH SIDDIQUI, JUSTICE
A.R. Akhtar for Petitioner (in C.P. No. D-2293 of 1997). Khalid Farooqui for Petitioner (in C.ps. Nos.D-1051.of 1992, 1132 to 1140, 1175 to 1182 of 1995, 1736 and 1745 of 2000). Abdul Qadir Khan for Petitioner (in C.P. No. D-1241 of 1997). H.A. Rehma
Constitutional Petitions Nos. D-1051, D-2069, D-2070, D-2680, D-2681, D-2682, D-2683, D-2684,D-2085, D-2975, 541, D-1736 and D-1745 of 2000, decision dated: 30-01-2003
S. AHMED SARWANA, JUSTICE MUHAMMAD MUJEEBULLAH SIDDIQUI, JUSTICE
A.R. Akhtar for Petitioner (in C.P. No. D-2293 of 1997). Khalid Farooqui for Petitioner (in C.ps. Nos.D-1051.of 1992, 1132 to 1140, 1175 to 1182 of 1995, 1736 and 1745 of 2000). Abdul Qadir Khan for Petitioner (in C.P. No. D-1241 of 1997). H.A. Rehma
MUHAMMAD IRSHAD and another
VS
DEPUTY DIRECTOR ADJUDICATION and others
Law: Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947
Section: 12,12(1),23B(4),24(2)
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 199
(a) Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (VII of 1947)---Ss. 12(1), 23-B(4) & 24(2)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Constitutional petition---Payment of Foreign Exchange for exported goods within stipulated period--¬Failure to make such payment---Imposition of penalty under S.23-B of the Act---Validity---Petitioners had given an undertaking to repatriate sale proceeds within prescribed time, but failed to do so and thus had patently contravened provisions of S.12(1) of the Act---Petitioners could and should have approached Pakistan Embassy Trade Mission, Foreign Chamber of Commerce or commenced legal proceedings for recovery of sale proceeds against buyer in country of export---If petitioners were unable to realize export proceeds, they should have proved in proceedings that same beyond their control as they had taken all possible steps for its recovery---Petitioners having failed to do so had made themselves liable to be prosecuted and penalized under S.23-B of the Act---Undertaking given by petitioners on Form "E" was simple and straightforward promise to deliver value of exported goods in foreign exchange to Bank---Such promise was an unilateral act---Not necessary for State Bank of Pakistan to prove any complicity of petitioners with any other person for proving contravention of understanding---Failure to fulfill undertaking by itself was a clear cut proof of contravention of promise---Provisions of S.24(2) of the Act would not apply to such case---Proceedings conducted by Adjudicating Officers appointed by State Bank of Pakistan for violation of S.12(1) of the Act by petitioners were within their jurisdiction under S.23-B of the Act and penalties awarded by them were valid---High Court dismissed Constitutional petitions with costs as being mala fide. 1994 SCMR 2123; 1998 SCMR 1404; 1998 SCMR 383; 2001 MLD 1554; State Bank of Pakistan v. S.K. Mahboob-ur-Rehman and others 1971 SCMR 642 and state Bank of Pakistan v. Abdus Sattar 1968 SCMR 283 ref. Hoosen Dawood & Company v. Government of Pakistan Civil Petition No. 138-K of 1992 rel. (b) Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (VII of 1947)--- ----Ss. 23 & 23-B [as inserted by Finance Act (VI of…
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