UNIVERSAL RECYCLING vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Revenue Division/Chairman FBR Ss

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

UNIVERSAL RECYCLING VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Revenue Division/Chairman FBR Ss. 25, 25-a & 25-D [as amended vide Finance act, 2019]---assessment of imported goods---Values of goods, determining of---'Director of Valuation' or 'Collector of Customs'---Valuation advice and a Valuation Ruling, distinguishing of---Petitioner (importer/company) invoked constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court challenging the authority of the assistant Collector of Customs in issuing a Circular/Notification by the subject of "assessment alert"---Plea of the assistant Collector of Customs was that the "assessment alert" was issued by the approval of the Collector of Customs---Validity---Post Finance act, 2019, under S.25-a of the Customs act, 1969, it is the Director of Valuation who can determine the values after following the methods as provided under S. 25 of the Customs act, 1969, and (can) notify the same---against such determination , an aggrieved person can approach the Director General for its revision under S. 25-D of the Customs act, 1969---Collector of Customs can only make a reference to the Director of Valuation for determination of Value(s) in terms of S. 25-D of the Customs act, 1969, and nothing beyond that---In the present case, apparently a reference had already been made---Impugned assessment alert was not a Valuation Ruling, but was an advice at the most which had no binding force; nor the Collector of Customs had any jurisdiction to do so---Moreover, a Valuation advice (and not a Valuation Ruling) is nothing but an advice which has no binding effect, whereas it is not to be taken as a conclusive evidence while making assessment of goods, and reliance upon the Valuation advice simplicitor is not a valid basis of assessment of the value of imported goods within the framework of S.25 of the Customs act, 1969---If it had been a case of exercising powers in terms of S. 25-a of the Customs act, which admittedly was not the situation in present case, the respondents/Department may have had a case, but in the present case, a Valuation Ruling was yet to be issued in terms of S.25-a of the Customs act, 1969---at best the assessment can only be made in terms of S.25 of the Customs act, 1969 and not otherwise ; either by way of an assessment alert or in any other manner---Even otherwise, under the scheme of the Customs act, 1969, the Collector on its own motion can not determine / notify the values by way of any circular, letter, assessment alert or even an advice---Collector through his authorized officers can only assess and determine the values in terms of S. 25 of the Customs act, 1969, however, the power is restricted to and is applicable on consignments imported by the respective individuals and does not confer any authority across the board for fixation or determination of values---Therefore, as a natural corollary, the assistant Collector of Customs by way of any purported delegation of power can not issue assessment alert when the Collector himself is not competent to issue any Circular etc.---High Court viewed that goods-in-question shall strictly be assessed in terms of S. 25 of the Customs act, 1969 by the Competent Officer and appealable assessment order be passed in terms of S. 80 of the Customs act, 1969, if needed--- High Court set-aside the impugned Circular /Notification, by the subject of "assessment alert", issued by the assistant Collector of Customs---Constitutional petition, filed by the importer / company, was allowed, in circumstances.

UNIVERSAL RECYCLING vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Revenue Division/Chairman FBR Ss — 2024 PTD 754 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PTD