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

Citation Name: 2023 PTD 750 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case COLLECTOR CUSTOMS MCC, PESHAWAR vs PAINDA NOOR Taxing statute — 2023 PTD 750 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Citation
2023 PTD 750 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT
Court
Peshawar High Court
Year
2023
Reporter
PTD
Parties
Citation Name: 2023 PTD 750 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case COLLECTOR CUSTOMS MCC, PESHAWAR vs PAINDA NOOR Taxing statute
Subject matter
Tax & Customs
Provisions referred to
S. 3

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

Citation Name: 2023 PTD 750 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case COLLECTOR CUSTOMS MCC, PESHAWAR VS PAINDA NOOR Taxing statute---Two interpretations---Principle---Taxing statue usually contains charging and machinery provisions--- Former fixes liability to pay tax and has to be constructed strictly--- Where two reasonable interpretations are possible, one which favors the tax payer should be accepted. Citation Name: 2023 PTD 750 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case COLLECTOR CUSTOMS MCC, PESHAWAR VS PAINDA NOOR Ss.2(s), 16, 18, 79, 178 & 196---Imports and Exports (Control) Act (XXXIX of 1950), S.3(3) &(10)---Notification SRO No.499(I)/2009, dated 13-06-2009, Clause (b)---Reference---Vehicle used in smuggling---Confiscation---Barring clause---Confiscation of vehicle by authorities on the plea that it had been used in smuggling---Validity---In order to attract baring clause i.e. clause "b" of Notification SRO No.499(I)/2009, dated 13-06-2009, authorities had to establish that smuggled goods which a vehicle was carrying were concealed in false cavities or the vehicle was wholly and exclusively used in smuggling of goods---Word wholly and exclusively used in Notification SRO No.499(I)/2009, dated 13-06-2009, were used in adjective form which meant "in its entirety" and was being used for no purpose other than smuggling as the word exclusively denoted---In the present case neither the smuggled goods were concealed in false cavities of vehicle in question nor it was the normal course of business of the owner of vehicle to use the same for the purpose of smuggling---When the vehicle in question had no history of being repeatedly involved in smuggling of goods then under Cl. 2(f) of Notification SRO No.499(I)/2009, dated 13-06-2009, it could be released against payment of redemption fine and vehicle would not be liable to outright confiscation under clause (b) of Notification SRO No.499(I)/2009, dated 13-06-2009---High Court declined to interfere in the order passed by Customs Appellate Tribunal---Reference was dismissed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2023 PTD

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