Case Details

Citation(s)
2006 SLG 687 2006 SLD 687 2006 PTD 2231 2007 PTCL 50
Lahore High Court
Customs Appeal No.9 of 2004, decision dated: 6-06-2006, hearing DATE : 27-03-2006
NAZIR AHMAD SIDDIQUI, JUSTICE MUHAMMAD NAWAZ BHATTI, JUSTICE
Mian Ashiq Hussain for Appellant. Ch. Saghir Ahmed for
Respondent.

NORTHERN POWER GENERATION COMPANY LTD. THROUGH PROJECT DIRECTOR

VS

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, COLLECTORATE OF CUSTOMS, SALES TAX and CENTRAL EXCISE, MULTAN

Law: Customs Act, 1969

Section: 18

Customs Act (IV of 1969)--Ss. 18(2), 19 & Sched.---S.R.O. 279(1)/94, dated 2-4-1994---S.R.O. 1050(I)/95, dated 29-10-1995---Goods chargeable to duty @ 65% ad valorem---Non-payment of duty on such goods for being exempt under S.R.O. 279(I)/94, dated 2-4-1994---Levy of regulatory duty by authority on such goods, excluded from such levy under S.R.O. 1050(I)195---Validity---Importer for non-payment of duty @ 65% on imported goods would not be entitled to exemption from payment of regulatory duty in terms of of Supreme Court reported as 1993 SCMR 412---Importer's appeal was dismissed in circumstances. Messrs Zaman Paper and Board Mill's case Civil Petitions Nos.1039-L, 1040-L, 1565-L and 1709-L of 1999; Molasses Trading and Export (Pvt.) Ltd.'s case 1993 SCMR 1905; Noon Sugar Mills Ltd. v. CIT PLD 1990 SC 1156 = 1990 PTD 768; PLD 1990 SC 68 and 1993 SCMR 1523 ref. Collector of Customs v. Ravi Spinning Mills Ltd. and others 1999 SCMR 412 fol. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD NAWAZ BHATTI,. J.---As per learned counsel for the appellant, facts in brief are that, "the appellant, a subsidiary Company of WAPDA, imported machinery and equipment, which was exbonded from October, 1995 to December, 1995. The imported goods were subject to customs duty @ 65%. Customs duty, however, was exempted under S.R.O. 279(I)/94, dated 2-4-1994---the machinery and equipment was to be used for setting up the power project of WAPDA"; that, "on 29th October, 1995, the Federal Government issued S.R.O. No.1050(I)/95 levying regulatory duty @ 5% and 10% for the respective categories. The goods chargeable to duty @ 65% ad valorem were, however, excluded from the levy of regulatory duty under Clause (ii)(b) of the said Notification"; that, "the Customs Authorities, levied 5% regulatory duty on the machinery and equipment---purportedly for the reason that after the effect of exemption, the goods were chargeable to concessionary rate of 0%, which was covered under Clause (i) .of the Notification"; that the appellant filed Writ Petition No.4425 of 1997 in this Court challenging the levy of regulatory duty on the basis of the ratio laid down in the case of "Collector of Customs v. Ravi Spinning Mills Limited…
🔒
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