Allegation of Smuggling

2018 PTD 726 CUSTOMS-APPELLATE-TRIBUNAL-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Ss. 2(s), 16, 157 & 156(1)(8)(89)Allegation of smugglingOutright confiscation of seized goodsTruck was interceptedSearch of said truck resulted into recovery of foreign original tea in the vehicleOccupants of the vehicle failed to produce any legal documents/lawful possession of the said goods so recoveredCustoms Staff seized the foreign origin smuggled goods and the said vehicle

Deputy Collector Adjudication Customs ordered outright confiscation of the seized goods and released vehicle against 20% redemption fine

Collector Customs (Appeal) dismissed appeal of the appellant/ accused

Bill of Entries and all other documents produced by the appellant had shown that goods in question were imported by him

Department could not prove its case against the appellant regarding violation of Ss.2(s), 16 & 157 of the Customs Act, 1969

Appellant being manufacturer, could change the original packing after mixing and blending the tea

Goods, in question having been loaded on a truck were seized within the country which could not be treated as smuggled

Locally manufactured goods and imported goods purchased from the local markets, were not liable to confiscation

Once the goods were imported into the country for home consumption and issued a sales tax invoice in respect of imported goods, and goods after process or provisions of Customs Act, 1969, were not applicable to such goods assembling, cutting, mixing and preparation, were repacked

Department having failed to prove its case against appellant, appeal was allowed and department was directed to immediately work out the entire sales proceeds that were payable to the appellant accordingly, and release the vehicle unconditionally

Redemption fine imposed on the vehicle, was also ordered to be remitted.

2013 PTD 600 CUSTOMS-APPELLATE-TRIBUNAL-PESHAWAR Judicial Precedent

Ss. 2(s), 16, 17, 26, 157, 168, 179, 187 & 194-AImport and Export (Control) Act (XXXIX of 1950), S.3(1)Allegation of SmugglingSeizure and confiscation of goodsGoods/Foreign Origin Black Tea, along with truck carrying said goods, were seized on allegation of smugglingAdditional Collector Customs, vide order-in-original, confiscated goodsCollector Customs on appeal, vide order-in-appeal dismissed the appeal

Adjudicating Officer verified the import documents produced by the appellant/importer at the time of interception of goods and subsequently; it was never pointed out that any document so produced by the importer was false, fabricated or untrue; and he was quite satisfied with the verification reports received in that regard from concerned quarters

Though a number of cases were made out against the importer and litigation had undergone between the department and the importer, but the importer had discharged his onus within the meaning of S.187 of the Customs Act, 1969; and had successfully met with the burden to prove the legal import

Burden to prove smuggling stood shifted to the department and department had no proof contrary to the proof produced by the importer

Department had failed to produce any evidence, which could prove that Tea imported by the importer, was prohibited or restricted by the Government

Department, in circumstances, had failed to prove the charge of smuggling against the importer

Contention of department was that non-mentioning of the country of origin in the sales tax invoice produced by the importer, was not plausible, because there was no such column for the origin in the sales tax invoice

Importer being a manufacturer could blend the tea and repack the same

Case, otherwise did not lie within the pecuniary competence and jurisdiction of Additional Collector of Customs

Under provisions of S.17(3) of Customs Act, 1969 case should be adjudicated within a period of 120 days from the date of show-cause notice but said period had expired and no plausible and cogent reason had been shown by the department for such delay for passing the order-in-original

Importer was established to have been doing business of Black Tea, and was duly registered with Sales Tax, Income Tax Department, and Chamber of Commerce and Pakistan Tea Association bodies etc.

Possession of huge quantity of Black Tea by the importer, did not create a suspicion that the recovered Black Tea was smuggled one

Goods seized, in circumstances, were lawfully imported

Seized/confiscated goods/Tea, could immediately be returned unconditionally to the importer, in circumstances.