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

FATIMA FERTILIZER COMPANY vs CUSTOMS APPELLATE TRIBUNAL art — 2026 PTD 34 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation
2026 PTD 34 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court
Lahore High Court
Year
2026
Reporter
PTD
Parties
FATIMA FERTILIZER COMPANY vs CUSTOMS APPELLATE TRIBUNAL art
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 179---J

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

FATIMA FERTILIZER COMPANY VS CUSTOMS APPELLATE TRIBUNAL art. 189---Customs act (IV of 1969), S. 179---Judicial precedents---Binding nature---"Stare decisis et non quieta movere", principle of---Customs appellate Tribunal ('Tribunal') distinguished the principle enunciated by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case referred to by the taxpayer on the ground that the ruling-under consideration pertains to the Sales Tax act, 1990, and is inapplicable to the time limitation provided under the Customs act, 1969---Validity---Tribunal fell into error while attempting to distinguish the binding principle enunciated in case referred to by applicant/Taxpayer on said ground---Such reasoning is misconceived and contrary to the settled law regarding the binding nature of precedents as per art. 189 of the Constitution---any declaration of law or enunciation of a legal principle by the Supreme Court is binding on all courts within the country---The maxim "Stare decisis et non quietamovere" (to stand by decision and not to disturb settled matters) underscores the mandatory nature of adherence to judicial precedents--- Therefore, the Tribunal's disregard of the ratio decidendi of the Supreme Court constitutes a grave error in law---Consequently, the findings of the Tribunal not only lack legal sanctity but are also rendered void-ab-initio--- Thus, the impugned judgment, being based on misinterpretation and misapplication of law, is liable to be set aside---Hence, answer to the proposed question was in affirmative i.e. in favour of applicant-taxpayer and against the respondent-department---Special Customs Reference application was allowed accordingly.

Other judgments reported in 2026 PTD

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