Find a Lawyer

CIBA-GEIGY (PAKISTAN) LTD. versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS (APPRAISEMENT), CUSTOM HOUSE, KARACHI

Section 19, 202, 223 and 224 of the Customs Act 1969 [as listed in the Finance Act (L of 1975)] Section RO 1147 (I) / 89, dated 27 198 CGO No. 11 of 1989 [e.g. Edited by KCGO No. 11. , Dated 8 10 1992] CGO No. 6 of 1987 [as amended by CGO, dated 29 6 1995] Article Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitutional Application Bank Guarantee, used in preparation of exempt medicines Applicant's raw material import applicant submitted bank guarantee in lieu of payment of customs duty, the applicant obtained a consumption certificate after the use of the raw material and submitted for release to the bank guarantee authority, Did not cancel the bank guarantee, but issued a notice to the bank for disclosure of the guarantee, and threatened to initiate action under the terms Will Section 202 of the Customs Act, 1969 correctly applied for the issuance of the Consumption Certificate over time, but it was issued by the Authority with a delay of a few days, which was amended by the C.C. GO No 6 stated that once the consumption certificate was issued which was issued in a fixed period, the period in section RO 1187 (I) / 89 would be restricted from the same date when the consumption before the customs authority Delay in the submission of the certificate was delayed in compliance with the same conditions. Due to such directives, and customs authorities should relinquish bank guarantees as the CBR High Court accepted the Constitutional application of the directive, declared the subsequent notice to be without legal authorization and by the applicant The bank guarantees offered were ordered to be canceled immediately top advocate from Mailsi lawyer