1994 PLP 1157 (MLD)
CHANAR SUGAR MILLS LIMITED — Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through the Secretary (Customs), Central Board of Revenue, Islamabad and 2 others — Respondents
| Citation | 1994 PLP 1157 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | CHANAR SUGAR MILLS LIMITED — Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through the Secretary (Customs), Central Board of Revenue, Islamabad and 2 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Customs Act (IV of 1969) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 PLP 1157 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Customs Act (IV of 1969) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994 PLP 1157 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1994 PLP 1157 (MLD) (CHANAR SUGAR MILLS LIMITED — Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through the Secretary (Customs), Central Board of Revenue, Islamabad and 2 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Makhdoom Ali Khan for Petitioner.
- Naimur Rehman, Standing Counsel for Respondents
- HAZIQUL KHAIRI, J.---The contention of the petitioner is that the goods imported by them are not locally manufactured whereas the order of the Principal Appraiser Group VII is that the goods fall under the locally manufactured list and, therefore, no exemption can be claimed by the petitioner under SRO 50(1)/92 dated 28th January, 1992. Mr. Naimur Rehman, learned Standing Counsel concedes that there was no material on record on the basis of which the said Principal Appraiser could have come to the conclusion that the goods were locally manufactured. Mr. Makhdoom Ali Khan in support of this contention has placed reliance on the case of Sohail Jute Mills, reported in PLD 1991 SC 329, in which identical question was raised and. the cases were remanded for fresh determination by the departmental officers after ascertaining the full facts of each case. Mr. Makhdoom Ali Khan has also submitted a copy of order dated 12-10-1992 passed in C.P. No.506 of 1992 which is a consent order to the effect that similar issues raised therein may be determined by the Collector of Customs after allowing full opportunity to the parties to produce evidence and after perusing all material on record. It may be stated here that Mr: Naimur Rehman, Advocate, appeared in the said case on behalf of the respondents and was a party to the consent order.
Headnotes / Summary
S.19
SRO 50(1)/92 dated 20th January, 1992
Exemption from duty was denied to petitioners on the ground that appraiser had found their goods to be locally manufactured which were not exempted from duty
Petitioner's contention was that appraiser had come to such conclusion without any material on record, therefore, his finding was not warranted
Consent order was passed by the Court to the effect that issues raised should be determined by the Collector of . Customs after allowing full opportunity to parties to produce evidence and after perusing all material on record
Collector of Customs was directed to decide the matter within specified period-- Meanwhile guarantee furnished by petitioner was ordered not to be encashed by the Authorities.
Judgment & Decree
HAZIQUL KHAIRI, J.
The contention of the petitioner is that the goods imported by them are not locally manufactured whereas the order of the Principal Appraiser Group VII is that the goods fall under the locally manufactured list and, therefore, no exemption can be claimed by the petitioner under SRO 50(1)/92 dated 28th January, 1992. Mr. Naimur Rehman, learned Standing Counsel concedes that there was no material on record on the basis of which the said Principal Appraiser could have come to the conclusion that the goods were locally manufactured. Mr. Makhdoom Ali Khan in support of this contention has placed reliance on the case of Sohail Jute Mills, reported in PLD 1991 SC 329, in which identical question was raised and. the cases were remanded for fresh determination by the departmental officers after ascertaining the full facts of each case. Mr. Makhdoom Ali Khan has also submitted a copy of order dated 12-10-1992 passed in C.P. No.506 of 1992 which is a consent order to the effect that similar issues raised therein may be determined by the Collector of Customs after allowing full opportunity to the parties to produce evidence and after perusing all material on record. It may be stated here that Mr: Naimur Rehman, Advocate, appeared in the said case on behalf of the respondents and was a party to the consent order. We accordingly direct that Collector of Customs to determine the question after giving full opportunity to the parties to produce evidence in support of their respective contentions. It is further ordered that the matter shall be decided by the Collector of Customs within three months, during which period the guarantee furnished by the petitioner, shall not be encashed by the respondents. The petition is accordingly disposed of in the above terms with no order a to costs. AA./C-312/K Order accordingly,