COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS through Additional Collector of Customs (Law) MCC-Appraisement (East), Customs House, Kar

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

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS through Additional Collector of Customs (Law) MCC-Appraisement (East), Customs House, Karachi VS ZAHID ALI & COMPANY Ss. 25 & 25a---Goods declaration---Imported goods---Determination of value---Methodology---Re-assessment, making of---Scope---appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue ('the Tribunal') set-aside the orders passed by the forums below against the importer (respondent)---Submission of the applicant / Collectorate was that the Tribunal had ignored the information gathered from (purported) official website (www.icegate.gov.in) which provided the actual transactional value of the goods-in-question---Validity---Section 25-a of the Customs act, 1969 ('the act, 1969') confers a power to determine the customs value and starts with a non-obstante clause and provides that notwithstanding the provisions contained in S. 25 of the act, 1969, the Collector of Customs on his own motion, or the Director of Customs Valuation [on his own motion or] on a reference made to him by any person [or an officer of Customs], may determine the customs value of any goods or category of goods imported into or exported out of Pakistan, after following the methods laid down in S. 25 of the act, 1969, whichever is applicable---It is clear that the provision of S. 25a of the act, 1969 would have an overriding effect while applying the values determined under it and it is only the methods of S. 25 of the act, 1969 which are to be followed; but in no manner any assessment can be made under S.25 of the act, 1969 when there is a Valuation Ruling under S. 25a of the act, 1969 already in field---It is not understandable as to how the applicant / Collectorate through a Show-Cause Notice had made an attempt to reassess the goods under S. 25 of the act, 1969 by showing intention to accept transactional value of the goods in-question---Notwithstanding this, even the proviso in S. 25-a of the act, 1969, whereby it is provided that where the value declared in a goods declaration or mentioned in the invoice retrieved from the consignment is higher than the value determined under subsection (1) of S.25-a of the act, 1969, such higher value shall be the customs value as inserted by way of Finance act, 2017, whereas, the present case was prior in time---Moreover, it was not a case where the transactional value was available with the department or the value mentioned in the invoice was retrieved from the consignment at the time of making any assessment under S. 25 of the act, 1969---In the present case , the goods were already released pursuant to a statutory Valuation Ruling and therefore, any information gathered from the website pursuant to which an attempt had been made to make assessment by accepting the transactional value under S. 25 of the act, 1969 could not be sustained---admittedly, the Valuation Ruling-in-question was never amended pursuant to such information from the website---Notably, in the Show-Cause Notice there again were vague allegations, whereas, neither the values so made available from the website had been mentioned; nor respondents had been confronted with any such unit value independently, and in a generalized manner, the Show-Cause Notice had been issued---No reason to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal was made out---Thus, the proposed question was answered in negative i.e. against the applicant / Department and in favour of the Respondents / importers---Reference applications were dismissed in limine, in circumstances.

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS through Additional Collector of Customs (Law) MCC-Appraisement (East), Customs House, Karachi vs ZAHID ALI & COMPANY Ss — 2025 PTD 765 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PTD