2003 PLP 562 (PTD)

‑‑‑‑Ss. 194‑B & 196‑‑‑Appeal before High Court against order Of Appellate Tribunal‑‑‑Scope‑‑‑Such appeal could be filed for determination of question of law. Syed M. Attiq Shah and Khalil Khan Khalil for Appellant. Syed Sardar Hussain for Respondent. Date of hearing: 21st November, 2002. KHALIDA RACHID, J.‑‑‑On 1‑5‑1999, the staff of Customs Mobile Squad, Mardan, in pursuance of a campaign, started against the non‑duty paid vehicles, intercepted a Toyota Hiace Van No.LOK‑3156, coming from Swabi side. Hilal Muhammad, respondent occupying the driver's seat, on demand failed to produce import documents, therefore, the customs staff detained the vehicle. In response to the show‑cause‑notice issued under section 26 of the Customs Act, the Bill of Entry No.00517, dated 26‑8‑1992 could not satisfy the Customs Authority that vehicle was legally imported, the vehicle was referred for chemical examination. On the chemical examination of the vehicle from Forensic Science Laboratory, the chassis number of the vehicle was found welded and refitted. The Adjudicating Officer through the impugned order in original, dated 10‑8‑1999 out rightly confiscated the vehicle in terms of section 156(1)(8)(89) and (90) read with section 2(s) of the Customs Act, 1969 read with section 3(3) of the Import and Export (Control) Act, 1950. The respondent aggrieved of the order in original, filed appeal which was also dismissed vide order in appeal, dated 24‑11‑1999 also impugned herein. However, the prayer of the respondent prevailed with the Customs Central Excise and Sales fax Appellate Tribunal which by virtue of order, dated 20‑2‑2001 ordered unconditional release of the vehicle. The grounds which weighed with the learned Appellate Tribunal were that the respondent in compliance with the requisition under section 26 produced Bill of Entry No.00517, dated 26‑8‑1992 duly attested by MRA Lahore whereof vehicle was registered and allotted Registration No.LOK‑3156 which number has remained unchanged throughout; that legal import of the vehicle Model 1992 could not be doubted as it was imported and cleared from Customs House Karachi on payment of leviable taxes; that owing to constant use of vehicle in all weathers, the chassis plate had rested and in order to support it a plain plate was welded. Taking into consideration the above mentioned grounds, the learned Appellate Tribunal out-rightly ordered the unconditional release of the vehicle. Saddened with such order, the Customs Department filed the instant first appeal.

2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant mainly stressed that report of chemical examination of the vehicle in question and by Forensic Science Laboratory, Peshawar categorically opined that the chassis was welded and refitted which is enough to suggest that chassis number of a lawfully imported vehicle has been fitted on non‑duty paid vehicle in question.

4. We are not persuaded to succumb to, the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant. It is not the case of the appellant that the chassis number was tampered with. As to welding of the chassis number, we believe the ground that due to weather hazards, the chassis plate had deteriorated, therefore, its three sides were welded. The Bill of Entry specifically mentioned the same make and model and verifying the Bill of Entry, the registration authority issued Registration No.00517 on 26‑8‑1992: The chemical examination report by Forensic Science Laboratory, Peshawar has become doubtful as chemical examination by F.I.A. was otherwise. There is no evidence whatsoever to prove that vehicle in question was imported into Pakistan unauthorisely or through unauthorized routes. Furthermore, appeal before the High Court against the order of Appellate Tribunal under section 194‑B of the Customs Act could be filed for the determination of questions of law. From the resume of the case above, there appears no law point involved C herein.

5. In view of above, we see no reason to interfere with the order of learned Appellate Tribunal. Hence the appeal is dismissed. S.A.K./644/P Appeal dismissed.