2007 PTD 198 (PLP)
MUHAMMAD ASHFAQ Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Revenue Division, Ministry of Finance, Islamabad and 2 others
| Citation | 2007 PTD 198 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Mujeebullah Siddiqui and Faisal Arab, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ASHFAQ Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Revenue Division, Ministry of Finance, Islamabad and 2 others |
| Primary Law | Customs Act (IV of 1969) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PTD 198 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Customs Act (IV of 1969) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 PTD 198 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Mujeebullah Siddiqui and Faisal Arab, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PTD 198 (PLP) (MUHAMMAD ASHFAQ Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Revenue Division, Ministry of Finance, Islamabad and 2 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Abdul Ghaffar Khan for Petitioner.
- Raja Muhammad Iqbal for Respondent No.3.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 25
Imported goods, valuation of
Method
Provisions of law contained in various subsections of S.25 of Customs Act, 1969 must be applied in sequential order. Rehan Umer v. Collector of Customs 2006 PTD 909 and Messrs Pakistan Dry Battery Manufacturers- Association v. Federation of Pakistan 2006 PTD 674 fol.
Judgment & Decree
The point involved in this petition is short and therefore, the petition is disposed of at the Katcha Peshi Stage. The grievance of the petitioner is that he imported 1800 cartons of `Yamama Cake' from Saudi Arabia and filed a Bill of Entry for clearance of goods. The declared value was not accepted and the Directorate of Customs Valuation and PCA, Customs House, Karachi, respondent No.3, issued a letter, dated 18-4-2006 directing that the valuation be determined under subsection (7) of section 25 of the Customs Act, and recovery action may be initiated. According to the petitioner no resort could be made to subsection (7) of section 25 directly, without re-course in the first instance, to the provisions contained in subsections (1) to (4) of section 25 and thereafter under subsections (5) and (6) in sequential order. He has submitted that the point agitated in petition already stands decided by this Court, in the case of Rehan Umer v. Collector of Customs, 2006 PTD 909 and in another case Messrs Pakistan Dry Battery Manufacturers Association v. Federation of Pakistan, 2006 PTD
674. The respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have filed their Para-wise comments, wherein it is stated by the respondent No.3, that they have communicated Customs Valuation under subsection (7) of section 25 of the Customs Act, to Board in compliance with the Board's letter C. No.4(I)/S/Val/2006, dated 13-2-2006. The respondent No.2 has stated that the valuation advice given by the respondent No.3 was shown to the petitioner at the time of assessment. The respondent No.2 who is required to make the assessment has not disputed the proposition of law that the provisions contained in various subsections of section 25 of the Customs Act, 1969 are to be applied in sequential order, as specified in subsection (10) of section 25 of the Customs Act, and fully discussed and considered in the two judgments by this Court on which the petitioner has placed reliance. In the above circumstances, the petition along with listed application is disposed of in the term that the respondent No.2 shall immediately initiate fresh assessment proceedings keeping in view the law as discussed by this Court in the two judgments referred to above. The petitioner shall furnish all necessary information if called, in addition to the information already furnished to the department. S.A.K./M-142/K Order accordingly.