ROZI KHAN vs The DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE GENERAL INTELLIGENCE AND INVESTIGATION-CUSTOMS, ISLAMABAD Ss

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

ROZI KHAN VS The DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE GENERAL INTELLIGENCE AND INVESTIGATION-CUSTOMS, ISLAMABAD Ss. 2(s) & 179(3), first proviso---Smuggling, matter of---Failure to pass order within stipulated statutory period---Extension, grant of---Scope---Collector of Customs---Powers---Plea of the applicant (seized vehicle owner) was that the Order-in-Original was ultimately passed after five months and twenty three days or so after issuance of SCN---Whether an extension could be granted by the Collector of Customs in terms of S. 179(3) of the Customs Act, 1969, ('the Act, 1969') in a case where S. 2(s) of the Act, 1969 had been invoked---Held: S. 179(3) of the Act, 1969 provides that an order is to be passed within 90 days of the issuance of a Show-Cause Notice, which period may be extended by the Collector for reasons to be recorded in writing for a period not exceeding 60 days; the first proviso to S. 179(3) then provides that in cases wherein the provisions of clause (s) of S. 2 of the Act, 1969 have been invoked, such case shall be decided within a period of thirty days of the issuance of Show Cause Notice---Thus, said proviso is an exception to the rule stated in S. 179(3) in two contexts: one, as opposed to the requirement to render a decision within 90 days of the issuance of the Show-Cause Notice, the first proviso provides that a decision, in a case where S. 2(s) of the Act, 1969 has been invoked, must be rendered within a period of 30 days; and two, while the general rule is that the 90-day period can be extended by the Collector up to a further period of 60 days, by recording reasons in writing, the proviso that regulates the limitation period for rendering a decision in relation to a case where S. 2(s) of the Act, 1969 has been invoked vests no such authority in the Collector to grant any extension---Order-in-Original was void having been issued beyond the period of limitation and could not be acted upon---Once it is declared that the Order-in-Original was barred by limitation and thus void, the question of whether the Customs Department correctly determined that the chassis plate of the confiscated vehicle was cut and welded does not remain a question that is open for adjudication as a factual matter or as a matter of law---High Court set-aside the impugned order of the Customs Appellate Tribunal for not appreciating that the Order-in-Original was barred by limitation and no penal consequences could flow towards the applicant on the basis of such void order, and directed that the vehicle of the applicant be handed over to him forthwith---Customs Reference, filed by owner of seized vehicle, was allowed accordingly.

ROZI KHAN vs The DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE GENERAL INTELLIGENCE AND INVESTIGATION-CUSTOMS, ISLAMABAD Ss — 2025 PTD 1601 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PTD