| Case ID |
1f07b0e0-1cc2-4933-ba67-a4fcb2bd923a |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
K-1072 of 2016 |
| Decision Date |
Apr 14, 2018 |
| Hearing Date |
Sep 19, 2017 |
| Decision |
The Customs Appellate Tribunal ruled that the proceedings against the appellant were fraught with legal infirmities and substantive illegalities, rendering the impugned orders null and void. The Tribunal emphasized that the show-cause notice must be precise and relevant to the law applicable, and any invocation of irrelevant sections would render it void ab initio. The decision also highlighted that mis-declaration charges could not be levied when the rates of duty were the same, and that Valuation Rulings must be supported by direct evidence of higher value. Ultimately, the Tribunal set aside the orders of the lower authorities and allowed the appeal without any costs. |
| Summary |
This case revolves around the Customs Appellate Tribunal's decision regarding the mis-declaration of goods by the appellant, MESSRS SPATCOS, KARACHI. The Tribunal found that the show-cause notice issued to the appellant was based on irrelevant sections of the law, which rendered it legally ineffective. The case involved the Customs Act, 1969, particularly sections on mis-declaration and valuation rulings. The Tribunal ruled that when the duty rates for the declared and assessed goods are the same, a charge of mis-declaration cannot stand. The Tribunal's decision reinforces the importance of precise legal documentation and adherence to established customs regulations, particularly regarding valuation and declaration. This case serves as a significant reference for future customs disputes involving mis-declaration and valuation issues, emphasizing the necessity for customs authorities to follow due process and uphold principles of natural justice. The Tribunal's ruling is pivotal for importers and customs officials alike, clarifying the standards required for legal documentation and the consequences of procedural lapses in customs enforcement. |
| Court |
Customs Appellate Tribunal
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
MUHAMMAD NADEEM QURESHI, MEMBER (JUDICIAL-I),
MUHAMMAD NAZIM SALEEM, MEMBER (TECHNICAL-II)
|
| Lawyers |
Nadeem Ahmed Mirza for Appellant.,
Raja Shakeel Ahmed, A.O. for Respondents.
|
| Petitioners |
MESSRS SPATCOS, KARACHI
|
| Respondents |
2 OTHERS,
DEPUTY COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS (R&D)
|
| Citations |
2018 SLD 2525,
2018 PTD 2475
|
| Other Citations |
Sadia Jabbar v. Director, Directorate General of Valuation 2012 SCMR 617 = 2012 PTD 898,
Danish Jehangir and others v. The FOP and others 2016 PTD 702,
Messrs Zeb Traders v. Federation of Pakistan 2004 PTD 369,
Assistant Collector v. Khyber Elec. Lamps 2003 PTD 1275,
D.G. Khan Cement v. Collector of Customs 2005 PTD 480,
Caltex v. Collector (2003) 88 Taxation 128 (Lah.),
Union Playing Card Company v. Collector of Customs 2002 MLD 130,
Atlas Tyres v. Addl. Collector 2002 MLD 180,
State Cement v. Collector PTCL 2001 CL 558,
Kashmir Sugar v. Collector 1992 SCMR 1898,
Rose Color v. Chairman, CBR 2013 PTD 813
|
| Laws Involved |
Customs Act, 1969,
Customs Rules, 2001
|
| Sections |
25,
25A,
32,
32(2),
Rr.107(a),
110
|