| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2010 SLG 724 2010 SLD 724 2010 PTD 2472 |
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue
Customs Appeal No.K-573 of 2009, decision dated: 31st August, 2010
MUHAMMAD ARIF MOTON, MEMBER, JUDICIAL
Nadeem Ahmed Mirza, Consultant for Appellant. Ghulam Yasin, Appraising Officer for
Respondent.
Customs Appeal No.K-573 of 2009, decision dated: 31st August, 2010
MUHAMMAD ARIF MOTON, MEMBER, JUDICIAL
Nadeem Ahmed Mirza, Consultant for Appellant. Ghulam Yasin, Appraising Officer for
Respondent.
Deprecated: preg_match(): Passing null to parameter #2 ($subject) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 411
Deprecated: htmlspecialchars(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 435
Law: Customs Act, 1969
Section: 25
Customs Act (IV of 1969)--Ss. 25, 32, 32-A, 79, 80, 156, 181 & 194-A---Customs Rules, 2001, Rr. 107, 109 & 110---Misdeclaration of description, classification, quantity and value of imported goods---Confiscation of goods---Appeal---Allegation against importer was that he deliberately misdeclared the description, classification, quantity and value of imported goods and besides importing excess quantity, undeclared banned items, in order to suppress the value, wilfully and with mala fide intention, had attempted to defraud the government from its legitimate revenue amounting to Rs.207,404--Imported goods were confiscated however, option was given to the importer to redeem the offending goods after payment of redemption fine---Validity---If the quantity was. excess as against the declared one, the Examining Officer should have stated in clear terms in examination report that same was found in excess of declared quantity, but that had not been done in the present case and no such allegations were levelled in the show-cause notice---Charges to that extent levelled against the importer stood extinguished---When the Customs Department disputed the value of any goods, it would take upon the responsibility to produce material to substantiate that the value of the goods had been misdeclared, but department had failed to do that, rendering the charge of misdeclaration of value as unsubstantiated and based on presumptive considerations---Goods not mentioned in the charter of show-cause notice, could not be subsequently taken up and adjudicated by the adjudicating authority in the adjudicating order---Impugned order-in-original based on such a deficient show-cause notice which did not mention the goads, was palpably illegal and void---Impugned orders were set aside, in circumstances. The Collector of Central Excise and Land Customs and others v. Rahm Din 1987 SCMR 1840; Messrs Mughal Tobacco Limited v. Collector of Customs 1986 MLD 190; Messrs Kamran Industries v. The Collector of Customs, Exports and 4 others PLD 1996 Kar. 68; Messrs Punjab Beverages (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Appellate Tribunal Customs and Excise and Sales Tax and 2 others 2002 PTD 2957; Innovative Trading…
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