PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

MUHAMMAD SOHAIL vs The COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS (APPEALS), KARACHI Ss — 2022 PTD 1545 CUSTOMS-APPELLATE-TRIBUNAL-LAHORE

Case information

Citation
2022 PTD 1545 CUSTOMS-APPELLATE-TRIBUNAL-LAHORE
Court
Lahore High Court
Year
2022
Reporter
PTD
Parties
MUHAMMAD SOHAIL vs The COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS (APPEALS), KARACHI Ss
Subject matter
Tax & Customs
Provisions referred to
S. 129; S. 32; S. 32-; S. 178; S. 156; S. 129---T

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

MUHAMMAD SOHAIL VS The COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS (APPEALS), KARACHI Ss.129, 198, 2(s), 16, 32, 32-a, 178 & 156(1)(64)---Constitution of Pakistan, arts. 4 & 25 ---Transit of goods across Pakistan to a foreign territory---Power to open packages and examine, weigh or measure goods---Smuggling---Mis-declaration---Punishment of persons accompanying a person possessing goods liable to confiscation---Scope---Customs officials examined the imported goods and found the same to be alcoholic beverages instead of soft drinks---Clearing agent had filed the declaration for transit to afghanistan under S.129 of the Customs act, 1969, purportedly on the instruction of the appellant---appellant was imposed upon a penalty ---appeal filed before Collector (appeals) was dismissed---Validity---Customs officials were not empowered to examine the goods for the reason that goods had arrived in transit to afghanistan and were not meant for home consumption---Section 2(s) did not apply to the case as the goods were imported in transit to afghanistan---Section 16 was a machinery section under which no charge could be framed---appellant had not submitted goods declaration for home consumption but had sought clearance of goods for transit to afghanistan, resultantly neither S. 32 nor S. 32-a was applicable---Invoking of S. 178 was out of place as the appellant was not found with the goods---Since there were no rules for afghan Transit Trade when show-cause notice was issued, therefore, clause (64) of S. 156(1) contained no consequence in contravention of S. 129---Treatment meted out to the appellant was against the principles enshrined in arts.4 & 25 of the Constitution as a person having similar role as that of appellant was not booked in the case---appeal was allowed and the impugned orders were set aside.

Other judgments reported in 2022 PTD

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English