1989 PLP 1583 (MLD)
Messrs Haji HABIB‑‑Petitioner Versus THE MEMBER, CBR, CUSTOMS‑JUDICIAL, KARACHI and others‑ Respondents
| Citation | 1989 PLP 1583 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Central Board of Revenue |
| Bench Members | Mr. I. A. Imtiazi, Chairman ‑ |
| Parties | Messrs Haji HABIB‑‑Petitioner Versus THE MEMBER, CBR, CUSTOMS‑JUDICIAL, KARACHI and others‑ Respondents |
| Primary Law | Customs Act (IV of 1969)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 1583 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Customs Act (IV of 1969)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 1583 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Central Board of Revenue bench comprising: Mr. I. A. Imtiazi, Chairman ‑.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 1583 (MLD) (Messrs Haji HABIB‑‑Petitioner Versus THE MEMBER, CBR, CUSTOMS‑JUDICIAL, KARACHI and others‑ Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- None, despite notices for Petitioner.
- Muhammad Sulaiman, Chief (Customs), CBR, Islamabad and Muhammad Bakhsh Tahir, Second Secretary (Judicial) CBR, Islamabad for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 12th November, 1987.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S.181‑‑Confiscation of goods‑‑Option to owner to redeem goods on payment of fine not obligatory‑‑Petitioner's arguments had been correctly rebutted by the adjudicating officer and the Appellate Authority‑‑Orders passed by Collector and Member, Board of Revenue were correct in law and based on facts‑‑Revision against Appellate order was thus rejected.
Judgment & Decree
4. Karachi Customs Preventive Staff on receipt of secret information intercepted a Toyota Corolla car on a Jetty near N.M.B. Wharf and searched it. The search led to the recovery of Pakistani currency amounting to Rs. 4,00,000 and some documents of a fishing craft. The driver of the car also pointed out that the currency was to be smuggled out in a cargo launch which too was rummaged and searched: that led to the recovery of Pakistani currency amounting to Rs. 21,00,000 plus Iranian Rials amounting to 8,80,000 and two passports. The car, the launch and the above currency were seized by Customs under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1969. Further investigation revealed that the said currency had been brought to the launch in the aforesaid car.
5. Accordingly, Show‑Cause Notice C. No. SIB‑1070/81, dated 6th January, 1982 was issued to the accused by the Collector of Customs (Preventive) Custom House, Karachi for contravening the provisions of the Foreign Exchange, Regulation Act, 1947 and the Customs Act, 1969.
6. Collector of Custom (Preventive), Custom House, Karachi after considering the reply to the show‑cause notice and after hearing the case adjudged the same vide Order‑in‑Original No. SIB/107/81, dated 6th January, 1986 and confiscated the seized currency and the launch outright. The car was also ordered to be confiscated but its release was allowed on payment of redemption fine amounting to Rs. 71,
700. The adjudicating authority also imposed the following penalties:‑ (a) Wahid Bux s/o Abdullah driver of the seized car. Rs. 100,000. (b) Habib s/o Sahib Dad owner of the car. Rs. 100,000. (c) Eight members of the crew of the launch. Rs. 10,000.
7. Against the above order‑in‑original, the accused filed on appeal with the Member (Judicial) on 13th February, 1986. Member Customs (Judicial) dismissed the appeal vide Order‑in‑Appeal No. 1(18) Cus. App/86, dated 8th April, 1987 (No. 16‑A of 19871.
8. The instant revision application was filed on 12th May, 1987. The petitioner has prayed that the order‑in‑appeal may be set aside; the car and the launch Al‑Badar may be returned to the owners and the applicants. His prayer was based on the arguments given in the memo of petition. The case was fixed for personal hearing on 1st October, 1987 and then on 12th November, 1987, Neither the petitioners nor their authorised representative appeared for personal hearing. The request of the petitioners for the adjournment of the case till the return of the Advocate from USA was regretted and communicated to him. The case cannot be kept pending for indefinite period and is decided ex parte on merits. The main arguments of the petitioner in support of his prayers are as under:‑ (1) The owner of the car and the launch had not been given the option for payment of fine in lieu of confiscation under section 181 of the Customs Act, 1969. (2) The adjudicating officer and appellate authority has not examined the acquittal order of the Special Judge certificate for Haji Habib, the death certificate for Sakhidad and the non‑involvement of the owner of the launch Al‑Badar because he was not present at the time of seizure of the currency from his launch.