THE DIRECTOR CUSTOM HOUSE, LAHORE vs DUTY FREE SHOP LIMITED SIALKOT S

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

THE DIRECTOR CUSTOM HOUSE, LAHORE VS DUTY FREE SHOP LIMITED SIALKOT S.194-C(5)---Difference of opinion between the Members of a Customs Appellate Tribunal / Bench---Mandatory procedure of adjudication---Scope--- From reading of S.194-C(5) of the Customs Act, 1969, it is evident that the statutory provision contemplates a specific procedure to be followed in the event of a difference of opinion between the Members of a Bench of Customs Appellate Tribunal ("Tribunal"). The legislative intent is unambiguous that the Members shall first formulate the precise point or points of difference, which shall then be referred by the Chairman of the Tribunal to one or more other Members for resolution. The final decision must reflect the opinion of the majority of the Members who have heard the case, including those who originally constituted the Bench. Such framework ensures adjudication in accordance with law and upholds the principle of collective decision-making. However, in the present matter, the Tribunal failed to adhere to the mandatory procedural requirements prescribed under S.194-C(5) of the Act. The Members of the original Bench did not record or frame the specific point or points on which they differed, as required under S.194-C(5). In absence of duly formulated points of difference, the matter was nonetheless referred by the Chairman to a Referee Member, contrary to the statutory mandate. The Referee Member proceeded to dispose of the matter without identifying or addressing any specific point or points of divergence and without assigning independent or reasoned justification for concurring with either Member of the original Bench. Such lapses amounted to clear violation of mandatory procedures prescribed by law. The impugned judgment was therefore vitiated by procedural illegality and could not be sustained. High Court set aside the impugned judgment passed by the Member (Technical) of the Tribunal, including the orders rendered by the dissenting Member and the Referee Member. Matter was remanded to the Chairman of the Appellate Tribunal for fresh hearing and decision in accordance with law. Special Reference Application was disposed of accordingly.

THE DIRECTOR CUSTOM HOUSE, LAHORE vs DUTY FREE SHOP LIMITED SIALKOT S — 2026 PTD 434 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PTD