DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE GENERAL, INTELLIGENCE AND INVESTIGATION (CUSTOMS) vs ALTAF HUSSAIN S — 2026 SCMR 101 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Citation: 2026 SCMR 101 SUPREME-COURT
Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
Year: 2026
Reporter: SCMR
Parties: DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE GENERAL, INTELLIGENCE AND INVESTIGATION (CUSTOMS) vs ALTAF HUSSAIN S
Subject matter: Criminal
Provisions referred to: S. 179; S. 74---A; Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990); Customs Act; Sales Tax Act

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

DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE GENERAL, INTELLIGENCE AND INVESTIGATION (CUSTOMS) VS ALTAF HUSSAIN S. 179(4)---Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990), S. 74---Adjudication of cases in custom matters---Extension of time, granting of---Board of Revenue, powers of---Scope---Extension of time can only be granted by FBR in "exceptional circumstances"---The case arose under the Customs Act, 1969, involving the issue of whether the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) had validly extended the time limit for adjudication under section 179(4) of the said Act---The petitioner sought to rely on the case reported as '2017 SCMR 1427' concerning Section 74 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, arguing that asimilar principle of extension applied---Validity---Firstly, the present matter had arisen under the Customs Act, 1969 and the relevant statutory power which was claimed was exercised by the Board (FBR) was conferred by subsection (4) of Section 179 of the said Act, which provided that; "The Board shall have the powers to regulate the system of adjudication including transfer of cases and extension of time- limit in exceptional circumstances"---It was clear from a perusal of the said provision that the power to grant an extension was circumscribed, and was to be exercised only in "exceptional circumstances"---Section 74 of the 1990 Act on the other hand provided that the Board (FBR) was empowered to grant an extension to the extent found "appropriate"---There was an obvious and clear difference between the two provisions and, as relevant in the present case, the power under Section 179(4) was much narrower and circumscribed---Therefore, the case reported as '2017 SCMR 1427' which was sought to be relied upon by the petitioner had no relevance---Petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2026 SCMR

2026 SCMR 1063 SUPREME-COURTMUHAMMAD IMRAN VS ISHFAQ AHMED. Ss. 12 & 39---Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell---Agreement already cancelled by Court of c…
2026 SCMR 1056 SUPREME-COURTSALAMAT ALI VS State. S. 365-A---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Ss. 6 & 7(e)---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 129(g)---Kidnapping…
2026 SCMR 36 SUPREME-COURTMUHAMMAD ASHRAF ANJUM VS SABIR HUSSAIN Ss. 12 & 22---Contract Act (IX of 1872), S. 55---Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell--…
2026 SCMR 1045 SUPREME-COURTPROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Secretary Punjab Emergency Service Department, Lahore VS MUHAMMAD KHALIL. Art.260---Service of Pakistan---Meaning…
2026 SCMR 1045 SUPREME-COURTPROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Secretary Punjab Emergency Service Department, Lahore VS MUHAMMAD KHALIL. S.4(2) [as amended by Punjab Emergency…
2026 SCMR 966 SUPREME-COURTGHULAM ALI VS ALI SHER. Art.185(3)---Appellate jurisdiction of Supreme Court---Concurrent findings---Interference. Concurrent findings canno…

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