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

The DIRECTOR through Deputy Director (Law) Directorate General of Intelligence and Investigation-Customs, Karachi vs JUTT LIGHTS Ss — 2023 PTD 834 CUSTOMS-APPELLATE-TRIBUNAL-LAHORE

Case information

Citation
2023 PTD 834 CUSTOMS-APPELLATE-TRIBUNAL-LAHORE
Court
Lahore High Court
Year
2023
Reporter
PTD
Parties
The DIRECTOR through Deputy Director (Law) Directorate General of Intelligence and Investigation-Customs, Karachi vs JUTT LIGHTS Ss
Provisions referred to
HS Code

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

The DIRECTOR through Deputy Director (Law) Directorate General of Intelligence and Investigation-Customs, Karachi VS JUTT LIGHTS Ss.32(1), 25, 79, 181 & 156(1), Cls. 14 & 45---SRO No.486(I)/2007, dated 11-12-2008---SRO No.499(I)/2009 dated 13-06-2009---Mis-declaration---Description and quantity of imported goods---Seizure of consignment at port area---Re-examination---Reporting agency, powers of---Importer declared goods as Miscellaneous electronics items including LED lights/ fittings and fixture, bulbs and parts thereof, chandeliers, galvanized iron and steel screws, CTCP printing plates---Respondent/ importer contended that even one of the items i.e. CTCP Printing Plates was liable to be assessed in square meter but the Department had assessed the same in Kg. (Kilogram)---Held, that the entire exercise of re-examination and assessment conducted by the Reporting agency was not only illegal and without jurisdiction but it was faulty also---In relevant PCT heading the HS Code No. 3701.3020 of the CTCP printing plates was Square meter , thus the claim of the Appellant/Department was baseless that the same was liable to be assessed in Kilograms---Under SRO 486(I)/2007 read with letter dated 11-12-2018, Seizing Agency could only re-examine the consignment with prior approval of the Chief Collector of the Customs---No glaring discrepancy in description of imported items was found, thus no Mens Rea on the part of the respondent/importer could be established---Record revealed that the respondent/importer had already paid the fine and penalty as adjudged vide impugned Order-in-Original passed by the Adjudicating Authority, thus the matter could not be dragged further---No interference in impugned order passed by the Adjudicating Authority was made out---Appeal was dismissed, in circumstances. Head NotesCase Description

Other judgments reported in 2023 PTD

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