| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2006 SLG 669 2006 SLD 669 2006 PTD 378 |
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No. 11296 of 2005, heard on 15-09-2005
NASIM SIKANDAR, JUSTICE
Waqar Azim for Petitioner. Dr. Sohail Akhtar and Muhammad Nawaz Cheema for
Respondent.
Writ Petition No. 11296 of 2005, heard on 15-09-2005
NASIM SIKANDAR, JUSTICE
Waqar Azim for Petitioner. Dr. Sohail Akhtar and Muhammad Nawaz Cheema for
Respondent.
MICRO CORPORATION THROUGH MANAGING PARTNER
VS
DEPUTY COLLECTOR, CUSTOMS, SIALKOT
Law: Customs Act, 1969
Section: 32
Customs Act (IV of 1969)--Ss. 32 [as amended by Federal Laws (Revision and Declaration) Ordinance (XXVII of 1981)] & 156(14)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Constitutional petition---Withdrawal of rebate at a rate higher than admissible under law---Lodging of F.I.R. by Revenue without undertaking adjudication proceedings against petitioner---Validity---Provisions of S.32 read with S.156(14) of Customs Act, 1969 would attract only when on proper adjudication proceedings, petitioner was found to have acted dishonestly to claim excess amount of rebate---High Court accepted, constitutional petition and quashed F.I.R. in circumstances---Principles. A claim of a concession or a rebate at a higher rate than it is admissible under the law can attract the penal provisions of Customs Act, 1969 only if it is manifestly mala fide. The addition of words "knowing or having reason to believe that such document or statement is false" added in subsection (1) of section 32 by the Federal Laws (Revision and Declaration) Ordinance, 1981 was to clear the ambiguity in the law and to put a check on the power of the Revenue Authorities to proceed against unwary tax-payer. The knowledge of a person or the fact that he had reason to believe as to the falsity of the statement or the document can be determined and ruled upon only if a person as contemplated in the subsequent provisions of subsections (3) and (3-A) of section 32 is served with a notice and required to show cause and explain his position. The proceedings contemplated in the subsequent part of section 32 contemplate an action only on adjudication proceedings. Once these proceedings have culminated in a or order that the person filing the documents knew or had reason to believe them to be false in material particular, he can be brought to justice on criminal side. The addition of words "and upon conviction" added in subsection (1) of section 32' by aforesaid Ordinance of 1981 are indicative of the fact that criminal liability under section 32 will arise only, when earlier a person had, on proper adjudication proceedings, been found to have deliberately filed a false document or had made a false statement in a…
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