| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2003 SLG 504 2003 SLD 504 2003 PTD 2527 |
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue
Custom Appeal No. 2068/LB of 2001, decision dated: 8-03-2002, hearing DATE : 26-02-2002.
MIAN ABDUL QAYYUM, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) ZAFAR-UL-MAJEED, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)
Muhammad Akram Nizami for Appellant. Imran Tariq, D.R. with Manzoor Hussain, D.S. for
Respondent.
Custom Appeal No. 2068/LB of 2001, decision dated: 8-03-2002, hearing DATE : 26-02-2002.
MIAN ABDUL QAYYUM, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) ZAFAR-UL-MAJEED, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)
Muhammad Akram Nizami for Appellant. Imran Tariq, D.R. with Manzoor Hussain, D.S. for
Respondent.
Deprecated: preg_match(): Passing null to parameter #2 ($subject) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 411
Deprecated: htmlspecialchars(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 435
Law: Customs Act, 1969
Section: 215
(a) Customs Act (IV of 1969)---S.215---Service of order, decisions, etc.---Service of notices---No record---Presumption---In absence of any record regarding service of notices, it could not be presumed that the appellant was duly notified about the dates of hearing having been fixed. (b) Customs Act (IV of 1969)--- ----S. 215---Ex parte order without reason---Validity---In case of an ex parte order, reasons have to be given by the Adjudicating Officer in support of the order---Mere fact that party concerned did not appear to contest the show-cause notice did not prove the fact that the charges levelled in such show-cause notice stood proved. PLD 1998 Lah. 100 and 2001 CLC 903 rel. (c) Customs Act (IV of 1969)--- ----Ss. 17, 156(I)(8) (9), 168(2) & 180---S.R.O. 1374(I)/98, dated 17-12-1998---S.R.O. No.913 (I)/86, dated 5-10-1986--- Detention and confiscation of goods, imported in breach of S.15 or S.16 of the Customs Act, 1969---Confiscation of car on the ground that no one appeared to attend the hearing nor any written reply to show-cause notice had been received and charges stated in show-cause notice stood established--Validity----Mere fact that party concerned did not appear to contest the show-cause notice did not prove the fact that the charges levelled in such show-cause notice stood proved---Order was set aside for fresh decision according to law after hearing the parties and after receiving documents which they may like to produce---Adjudicating Officer was directed by the Appellate Tribunal to pass speaking order supported with sound reasons dealing with all the points raised by the parties. PLD 1998 Lah. 100 and 2001 CLC 903 rel JUDGMENT MIAN ABDUL QAYYUM, MEMBER (JUDICIAL).---This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Original No. 187 of 2001, dated 4-7-2001 (dispatched on 7-8-2001) passed by the learned Deputy Collector (Adjudication) Faisalabad whereby a Toyota Corolla Car bearing Registration No.B-2667 Kohat has been confiscated with the following observation contained in para 5 of the impugned order:-- "Judgment:------ I have examined the case record in details. Since no one appeared to attend the hearing nor any written reply to the…
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