| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2008 SLG 1039 2008 SLD 1039 2008 PTCL 409 2008 PTD 1494 |
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition Nos. 2415/07, 605/07, 544/07, 834/07, 1001/07, 1002/07, 1046/07, 1206/07, 1212/07, 1443/07, 1523/07, 5346/08 and 5536/2007, decision dated: 23rd May, 2008. dates of hearing: 15th, 18th and 21st April, 2008
KH. FAROOQ SAEED, JUSTICE
Nadeem-ud-Din Malik, Deputy Attorney General for
Respondent. Muhammad Nawaz Waseer, Federal Counsel. Nadeem-ud-Din Malik, Deputy Attorney General for
Respondent Muhammad Nawaz Waseer, Federal Counsel. Ahmer Bilal Sufi for respondent-Director Customs V
Writ Petition Nos. 2415/07, 605/07, 544/07, 834/07, 1001/07, 1002/07, 1046/07, 1206/07, 1212/07, 1443/07, 1523/07, 5346/08 and 5536/2007, decision dated: 23rd May, 2008. dates of hearing: 15th, 18th and 21st April, 2008
KH. FAROOQ SAEED, JUSTICE
Nadeem-ud-Din Malik, Deputy Attorney General for
Respondent. Muhammad Nawaz Waseer, Federal Counsel. Nadeem-ud-Din Malik, Deputy Attorney General for
Respondent Muhammad Nawaz Waseer, Federal Counsel. Ahmer Bilal Sufi for respondent-Director Customs V
MESSRS TOYO INTERNATIONAL MOTORCYCLE THROUGH PROPRIETOR
VS
FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN THROUGH SECRETARY, (REVENUE DIVISION) CENTRAL BOARD OF REVENUE, ISLAMABAD AND 3 OTHERS
Law: Customs Act, 1969
Section: 25
(a) Customs Act (IV of 1969)--Ss. 25 & 25-A---Determination of customs value of imported goods---Procedure---Authority as provided in S.25-A of Customs Act, 1969, while determining value of a particular item would have to follow procedure provided in S.25 thereof in sequence mentioned therein---Salient features of S.25-A of Customs Act, 1969 stated. (b) Interpretation of statutes--- ----Fiscal statutes---Methods of interpretation stated. The settled principles of interpretation of fiscal laws are that firstly, the law should be interpreted as it is and the intention of legislature should be gathered from the plain reading of the language of law. The second method of interpretation of fiscal statute is that if the construction of the language is not clear and there is a possibility of two interpretations, in such situation the interpretation is made in favour of the subject and not in favour of the Revenue. Messrs Volkervam (Pakistan) Ltd. v. Sindh Employees' Social Security Institution and another PLD 1985 Kar. 37 and Arif Hussain Shah v. Operative Director, Administration, Electric Equipment Manufacturing Co. Ltd. and another PLD 1979 Lah. 603 ref. Mr. J. Rowlet in Cape Brandy Syndicate v. Inland Revenue Commissioner 1921 K.B. 69; Messrs Hirgina and Co. (Pak.) v. Commissioner of Sales Tax Central Karachi 1971 SCMR 128; The Commissioner of Agri Income Tax East Bengal v. BWM Abdul Rehman 1973 SCMR 447 and Collector of Customs (Karachi) v. Messrs Abdul Majeed Khan 1977 SCMR 371 rel. (c) Customs Act (IV of 1969)--- ---Ss. 25 & 25-A---Preparation of value advice of imported goods---Mandatory to follow procedure provided in S.25 of Customs Act, 1969 while preparing such advice--Principles. (d) Customs Act (IV of 1969)--- ----S. 25-A---Word' "any person" as used in S.25-A of Customs Act, 1969---Connotation---Prefix "any" before "person" had enlarged its scope---Such person could be an individual firm, company, local manufacturer, importer, non-importer or a third person aggrieved for any reasons---Principles. (e) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)--- ----Art. 129(g)---Evidence available with a party, withholding of---Effect---Presumption would be that such party…
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