2005 PLP 1923 (PTD)
MUKHTAR AHMAD Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS and 3 others
| Citation | 2005 PLP 1923 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | M. Bilal Khan and Sh. Azmat Saeed, JJ |
| Parties | MUKHTAR AHMAD Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS and 3 others |
| Primary Law | Customs Act (IV of 1969) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 1923 (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Customs Act (IV of 1969) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2005 PLP 1923 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore High Court bench comprising: M. Bilal Khan and Sh. Azmat Saeed, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 1923 (PTD) (MUKHTAR AHMAD Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS and 3 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Akram Nizami, Advocate.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss: 156 & 196
Customs Authorities intercepted vehicle and its driver who failed to produce Registration Book or any legal proof of its import
Chassis number of said vehicle was found to have been tampered with
Only explanation offered was that vehicle could have been involved in an accident requiring repair
No specific assertion to that effect was made--Order confiscating vehicle was based on facts and appellant was given opportunity of hearing
No question of law had arisen requiring any expression of opinion by High Court
Appeal was dismissed, in circumstances. Muhammad Akram Nizami, Advocate.
Judgment & Decree
This appeal under section 196 of the Customs Act, 1969 has been directed against the order-in-appeal, dated 30-3-2005.
2. Brief facts leading to filing of this appeal are that the Customs Authorities intercepted a vehicle Toyota Hiace bearing Registration No. FDK 8011. The driver of the vehicle failed to produce the Registration Book or any legal proof of import. The chassis number was found to have been cut. The Forensic Science Laboratory on examination also reported that chassis number full (panel) had been cut, welded and refitted. In the circumstances, show-cause notice was issued and after hearing, vide order-in-original it was directed that the vehicle be confiscated.
3. Aggrieved the appellant filed an appeal before the Customs Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench-II, Lahore, which too did not find favour and was dismissed vide the impugned order. The Tribunal held as follows: "(5) We have heard both the parties and perused the appeal file before us. It is noted that the vehicle in dispute has been confiscated relying on the report of FSL, Lahore "chassis number plate has been cut and welded and refitted." The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the vehicle is old one and the welding marks might be the result of some repair; but he has failed to establish it with any evidence. We, therefore, find no reason to interfere in the impugned order-in-original and dismiss the appeal being without merit."
4. Learned counsel for the appellant has been heard and the record appended with this appeal has also been perused.
5. It is a matter of record that chassis plate has been tampered with. The only explanation offered is that vehicle may have involved in an accident requiring repair. No specific assertion to this effect was made. The impugned orders are based on facts. The appellants was given an opportunity of hearing. No question of law, as alleged, arises therefrom requiring any expression of opinion by this Court. This appeal is therefore, dismissed in limine. H.B.T./M-1037/L??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Appeal dismissed.