2012 PLP 71 (PTD)
Messrs BUSINESS IMPEX through Proprietor Versus DEPUTY DIRECTOR, CUSTOMS INTELLIGENCE AND INVESTIGATION, ISLAMABAD and 2 others
| Citation | 2012 PLP 71 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Islamabad High Court |
| Bench Members | Riaz Ahmad Khan, J |
| Parties | Messrs BUSINESS IMPEX through Proprietor Versus DEPUTY DIRECTOR, CUSTOMS INTELLIGENCE AND INVESTIGATION, ISLAMABAD and 2 others |
| Primary Law | Customs Act (IV of 1969) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2012 PLP 71 (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Customs Act (IV of 1969) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2012 PLP 71 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Islamabad High Court bench comprising: Riaz Ahmad Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2012 PLP 71 (PTD) (Messrs BUSINESS IMPEX through Proprietor Versus DEPUTY DIRECTOR, CUSTOMS INTELLIGENCE AND INVESTIGATION, ISLAMABAD and 2 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Naeem Qazi for Petitioner.
- Qazi Ghulam Dastgir for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 168, 179 & 193
Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199
Constitutional petition
Petitioner imported mobile phones from china under Pak-China Free Trade Agreement
Customs Authorities refused to clear said consignment, as some discrepancies in the model/number of phones were detected
Consignment having been confiscated, petitioner filed appeal under S.193 of the Customs Act, 1969, which was accepted with order to release goods on payment of leviable duty and other taxes
Petitioner having paid requisite taxes, goods were ordered to be released
Before the goods could be removed from the Customs Warehouse, petitioner was informed that there was liability of duty and other taxes against the petitioner at Quetta Customs Collectorate and as long as said liability had not been cleared, consignment could not be released
Liability of the petitioner at Quetta, was pending adjudication before Appellate Tribunal and operation of the order had already been suspended
Petitioner having paid all the taxes and dues regarding the imported goods, at Islamabad release of said goods at Islamabad, could not be refused to him, in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
RIAZ AHMAD KHAN, J.
This order is directed to dispose of Writ Petition No.112 of 2011.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner imported mobile phones from China under Pak-China Free Trade Agreement. The Customs authorities refused to clear the said consignment, as some discrepancies in the model number were detected. Accordingly, a show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner and afterwards the goods were confiscated vide Order No.5 of 2010. The petitioner filed appeal under section 193 of the Customs Act, 1969, which was accepted and Collector, Collectorate of Customs (Appeals), Islamabad ordered release of goods on payment of leviable duty and other taxes. The petitioner paid required taxes and accordingly the goods were released. Before the goods could be removed from the customs warehouse, the petitioner was informed that there was a liability of duty and other taxes against the petitioner at Quetta Customs Collectorate. As long as that liability has not been cleared, the consignment could not be released. The petitioner was thus, constrained to file the present writ petition with the prayer that the order regarding stoppage of goods is unlawful and that respondents be directed to release the goods.
3. The case of the petitioner is that as far as liability against the petitioner at Quetta is concerned, the appeal regarding the same is pending before the Customs Appellate Tribunal, Karachi and stay order has already been issued by the said Court. In the presence of stay order, the release of goods at Islamabad cannot be stayed.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents admitted that stay order has been issued regarding liability outstanding against the petitioner at Quetta. However, he submitted that since other remedy under the Customs Act is available to the petitioner, so writ cannot be issued.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record.
6. The petitioner in the present case has paid all taxes and dues regarding mobile phones imported from China. Release of these goods cannot be refused to him. As far as liability at Quetta is concerned, the same is pending adjudication before Appellate Tribunal, Karachi and the operation of the order has already been suspended. In these circumstances, the release of goods at Islamabad cannot be refused to the petitioner. The order regarding release of goods has already been made by the competent forum and compliance of the same is the duty of the respondents. In these circumstances, this writ petition is accepted and goods in question be released as provided in the order dated 15-10-2010 of Collectorate of Customs (Appeals), Islamabad. H.B.T./59/Isl Petition accepted.