PTD 2007

2007 PLP 2466 (PTD)

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS (EXPORT), KARACHI Versus CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SALES TAX APPELLATE .TRIBUNAL, KARACHI and another

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Civil Petition No.436-K of 2003, decided on 17th October, 2006.
Honorable Judges
Rana Bhagwandas and Hamid Ali Mirza, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2007 PLP 2466 (PTD)
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Rana Bhagwandas and Hamid Ali Mirza, JJ
Parties COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS (EXPORT), KARACHI Versus CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SALES TAX APPELLATE .TRIBUNAL, KARACHI and another
Primary Law Customs Act (IV of 1969)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP 2466 (PTD)?

This judgment primarily cites: Customs Act (IV of 1969) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 PLP 2466 (PTD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Rana Bhagwandas and Hamid Ali Mirza, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 2466 (PTD) (COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS (EXPORT), KARACHI Versus CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SALES TAX APPELLATE .TRIBUNAL, KARACHI and another). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Customs Act (IV of 1969)

Representation

  • Akhlaq Ahmad Siddiqui, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
  • Nemo for Respondents.
  • Date of hearing: 17th October, 2006.
  • 2. We have heard Mr. Akhlaq Ahmad Siddiqui learned Advocate -on-Record .for the petitioner and gone through the impugned order of the High Court as well as order passed by the Customs, Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, whereby penalty of Rs.75,000 imposed on the Exporter was set aside.

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal from the order, dated 11-4-2003 in Special Custom Appeal No.4 of 2002 passed by the High Court of Sindh, Karachi).

S. 32

Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)

Misdeclaration by exporter

Short question involved in the petition for leave to appeal was, whether the respondent-Exporter, by declaring weight of Dana Printed Fabric less by 14 % was guilty of misdeclaration within the meaning of S.32 of Customs Act, 1969

Impugned orders tended to show that in fact no concrete and definite evidence was available about short of weight by 14 % as alleged

Even if that be so it had been fairly conceded before the forums below, including the High Court that by declaring the weight of the consigmnent less by 14%, exporter neither derived any gain nor caused arty loss to the Customs hierarchy

No fault or legal flaw was found with the approach of the forums below, which was not open to any exception

No question of law of public importance and no ground for grant of leave, having been made out, petition was dismissed and leave to appeal was refused.

Judgment & Decree

RANA BHAGWANDAS, J.

Short question involved in this petition for leave to appeal is whether the respondent-Exporter by declaring weight of Dana Printed Fabric .less by 14 % was guilty of misdeclaration within the meaning of section 32 of the Customs Act, 1969`?

2. We have heard Mr. Akhlaq Ahmad Siddiqui learned Advocate -on-Record .for the petitioner and gone through the impugned order of the High Court as well as order passed by the Customs, Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, whereby penalty of Rs.75,000 imposed on the Exporter was set aside.

3. A glance at the impugned orders tends to show that in fact there was no concrete and definite evidence of loss of weight by 14% as alleged and even if that be so it has been fairly conceded before the forums below including the High Court that by declaring the weight of the consigmnent lesser by 14% Exporter neither derived any gain nor --caused any loss to the Customs hierarchy. We do not find any fault or legal flaw with the approach by the forums .below which is not open to any exception.

4. No question of law of public importance and no ground for grant of leave is thus, made out.

5. Petition is therefore, dismissed and leave refused. H.B.T./C-13/SC Leave refused.