| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2006 SLG 688 2006 SLD 688 2006 PTD 2237 2007 PTCL 78 2007 PTR 70 |
Sindh High Court
Customs Reference Application No.166 of 2005, decision dated: 14-06-2006. dates of hearing: 25-04-2005 and 26-04-2006.
MUHAMMAD MUJEEBULLAH SIDDIQUI, JUSTICE SYED ZAWWAR HUSSAIN, JAFFERI, JUSTICE
Aziz A. Shaikh and Khurram Shaikh for Applicant. Haider Iqbal Wahniwal for
Respondent.
Customs Reference Application No.166 of 2005, decision dated: 14-06-2006. dates of hearing: 25-04-2005 and 26-04-2006.
MUHAMMAD MUJEEBULLAH SIDDIQUI, JUSTICE SYED ZAWWAR HUSSAIN, JAFFERI, JUSTICE
Aziz A. Shaikh and Khurram Shaikh for Applicant. Haider Iqbal Wahniwal for
Respondent.
PAK SUZUKI MOTORS CO. LTD. THROUGH SENIOR GENERAL MANAGER (CORPORATE PLANNING & LOGISTICS), KARACHI
VS
COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS THROUGH ASSISTANT COLLECTOR (PROCESSING), KARACHI
Law: Customs Act, 1969
Section: 25(3),193(4),194,196
Law: Customs Rules, 2001
Section: 2(g),Expin.II
(a) Customs Act (IV of 1969)--S. 193(4)---Appellate Authority, order of---Essentials---Appellate Authority in exercise of quasi judicial function was required to decide appeal and not merely to dispose of the same---Such order must be a speaking order disclosing application of mind to the facts and law and reasons for every finding---Practice of dealing with an issue in a perfunctory manner and disposing of appeal by a slipshod order devoid of any reason---High Court strongly deprecated such practice---Principles. (b) Customs Act (IV of 1969)--- ----S. 25(3)---Customs Rules, 2001, R. 2(g), Expin. II---Relationship between buyer and seller in terms' of the rules---Expression "associated" used in R.2(g) of Customs Rules, 2001 while-defining expression "related persons"---Scope---Expression "associated" would not be taken as independent expression, but would be considered in the light of Explanation II to R.2(g) of Customs of Rules, 2001---Principles. (c) Customs Act (IV of 1969)--- ----Ss. 194 & 196---Reference to High Court---Question of fact not decided by Tribunal---Validity---Tribunal as a final fact-finding authority was obliged to consider such question---High Court in exercise of its advisory jurisdictions would not give any finding of fact for the first time in such a case. (d) Customs Act (IV of 1969)--- ----S. 25(3)(a)(b)---Interpretation of clauses (a) & (b) of S.25(3) of Customs Act, 1969---Use of word "or" in between such clauses made them disjunctive and/or not injunctive---Conditions specified in both such clauses not required to be satisfied simultaneously---Transaction value would be accepted for purpose of S.25(1) of Customs Act, 1969, if either of the .conditions specified in such clauses, was satisfied---Principles. (e) Interpretation of statutes--- ----Term used by legislature---Substitution of such term by any executive or judicial authority not warranted. (f) Customs Act (IV of 1969)--- ----S. 25(1)(3)---Customs Rules, 2001, R.2(g), Expin. II---Deduction of trade discount from price of imported goods---Validity---Exporter had allowed discount to applicant on importing 11280 vehicles in CKD kits---Exporter had not allowed discount to…
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