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 & 179(4)---Smuggling, matter of---Failure to pass order within stipulated statutory period---Extension, grant of---Scope---Federal Board of Revenue, powers of---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 the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) is vested with authority to grant an extension in relation to a case where S. 2(s) of the Customs Act, 1969, ('the Act, 1969') has been invoked, while exercising its authority under S. 179(4) of the Act, 1969---Held: The first proviso to S. 179(3) of the Act, 1969 (that, in case of smuggling, order to be passed in 30 days) only creates a carve out to the rule stated in S. 179(3) of the Act 1969; it does not provide a carve out against the rule stated in S. 179(4) of the Act, 1969---Consequently, the proviso doesn't oust the jurisdiction vested in FBR in terms of S.179(4) of the Act, 1969 to grant an extension of time limit in exceptional circumstances---Where the period of limitation prescribed under S. 179(3) of the Act, 1969 stands expired, the FBR is vested with no jurisdiction to bring back the expired period to life by granting an extension which can then be applied retrospectively---In the present case, the limitation period stood expired by the time when an Order-in-Original had not been issued; then, the FBR exercised its discretion under S. 179(4) of the Act, 1969 to grant extension for a period of 120 days---Such extension would apply prospectively with effect from the date when such extension was granted, however, the limitation period prescribed under the first proviso to S. 179(3) of the Act, 1969 already stood expired by almost two months---Therefore, such/said extension was of no avail to the Customs Department to bring the Order-in-Original within the time prescribed under the first proviso to S. 179(3) of the Act, 1969---Once it is decided that the Order-in-Original has been issued beyond the period of limitation, the consequence is that such order is found to be void and unenforceable---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