Case Details

Citation(s)
2003 SLG 515 2003 SLD 515 2003 PTD 2642
Sindh High Court
Constitutional Petition No. D-373 of 2003, decision dated: 4-07-2003, hearing DATE : 16-05-2003
ANWAR ZAHEER, JAMAH, JUSTICE GULZAR AHMED, JUSTICE
Dr. Amjad Hussain Bukhari for Petitioner. S. Mehmood Alam Rizvi, Standing Counsel for
Respondent No. 1. Akhtar Hussain For
Respondent No. 5.

MESSRS INTERGLOBE COMMERCE PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD

VS

GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN AND OTHERS

Law: Customs Act, 1969

Section: 21

Customs Act (IV of 1969)---S. 21---Notification S.R.O. 400(I)/97, dated 31-5-1997---Notification S.R.O. 435(I)/2001, dated 18-6-2001---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Exemption from customs duty--­Factual inquiry---Technical aspect of equipment---Locally manufactured parts---Compatibility with imported equipment---Dispute was with regard .to import. of equipment for oil exploration project---Components which could not be locally manufactured were exempted from import duty--­Engineering Development Board had decided that the disputed components could be locally manufactured, therefore, such components were not exempted under the Notification S.R.O. 400(I)/97, dated 31-5-1997 and Notification, S.R.O. 435(I)/2001, dated 18-6-2001---Plea raised by the importer was that the locally manufactured components were not compatible with the imported equipment and the Board had not provided opportunity of hearing to the importer---Validity---High Court in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction would not enter into disputed questions of fact and more so when the technicalities of manufacturing of equipment was involved---Law had itself created a forum for determining the disputed question about the status of imported equipment---Importer had submitted to such forum and after elaborate determination of all relevant aspects, the Board had decided against the importer---Function of Engineering Development Board was only to determine the question as to whether the equipment imported was being locally manufactured or not---Board was not supposed to determine the compatibility or suitability of the imported equipment with that of the equipment manufactured locally---Law did not make any provision for determi­nation of compatibility or suitability--- Engineering Development Board had examined and gone through the material placed by the importer and had also provided him opportunity of hearing and thereafter had passed the order---Such order did not suffer from any illegality requiring interference by High Court in Constitutional jurisdiction---Petition was dismissed in circumstances. Sohail Jute Mills Ltd. v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 1991 SC…
🔒
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