Case Details

Citation(s)
2008 SLG 1027 2008 SLD 1027 2008 PTD 1216
Sindh High Court
C.P. No.2254 of 2006, decision dated: 25-03-2008
MRS. YASMIN ABBASEY, JUSTICE QAMARUDDIN BOHRA, JUSTICE
Ghulam Ahmed Khan for Petitioner. Raja Muhammad Iqbal for
Respondent No. 2. Haider Iqbal Wahniwal for
Respondent No. 3.

MESSRS FACO TRADING THROUGH ATTORNEY

VS

FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN THROUGH SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD AND 2 OTHERS

Law: Customs Act, 1969

Section: 25

Customs Act (IV of 1969)--Ss. 25(1), 35, 81 & 194-A---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Constitution petition---Maintainability---Refund claim and duty draw back a mixed question of law and fact---Proper forum for---Subject consignment was to be assessed under which the point for consideration was of refund of differential amount deposited by petitioner for release of his consignment after provisional assessment under S.81 of the Customs Act, 1969 as according to petitioner by virtue of S.25(1) of Customs Act, 1969 the goods had to be assessed on the basis of transaction, and value and not otherwise---Proper forum for seeking relief of refund claim was the Customs Appellate Tribunal and before availing such relief constitutional petition before the High Court was not maintainable---Section 194-A of Customs Act, 1969 would be relevant for the purpose which prescribed that any person or the officer of customs aggrieved by any orders specified in S.194-A could appeal to Appellate Tribunal against such orders---With the omission of 1st Proviso to S.194-A of Customs Act, 1969, jurisdiction for payment of duty drawback lay with the Appellate Tribunal---To assess whether the importer or exporter was entitled to a duty drawback on a particular consignment proper enquiry was required which could not be held in constitutional petition as enquiry relating to duty drawback was a mixed question of law and fact---High Court was not a proper forum to examine and adjudicate upon a question as to whether petitioner was entitled to the refund of post dated cheques. ORDER MRS. YASMIN ABBASEY, J.---Precisely the facts of the case are that in February, 2006 petitioner imported Ceramic Tiles and Ceramic Wares from China. The goods were presented for the assessment as per transaction value but respondents Nos.2 and 3 i.e. the Collector of Customs (Appraisement) and Collector of Customs, Model Collectorate arbitrary enhanced the declared value. On protest of petitioner, goods were released under section 81 of the Customs Act, 1969 after deposit of post dated cheques for the differential amount of tax. It is stated that respondents Nos.2 and 3 despite the fact that neither…
🔒
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