Find a Lawyer

SHAHZAD AHMED CORPORATION versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN

Sections 4, 32, 168, 171 and 186 Section RO No. 388 (I) / 82, Dated 22 4 Constitution of Pakistan 1982 (1973), Article 199 Constitution Petition which is already out of charge by the Operating Officer (Intelligence, And Investigation) without complying with the provisions of Sections 168 and 171 of the Customs Act, 1969, neither the applicant was charged nor fined / fined for verification. No consideration was made, nor was the case presented under section 186 (2) of the Customs Act. 1969 The appraisal officer is entitled to confiscate the goods under section 168 (1) of the Customs Act, 1969 iz The officer had no record of possession and reason on which he formed this opinion That the goods had already been cleared by the Compensation Officer (being a proper officer) responsible for the seizure not to make a suitable officer suitable for the purposes of Sections 32 and 168 of the Customs Act, 1969) Under jurisdiction, its scope had stepped up. The appropriate officer Petitioner obtained a right of clearance of the goods after the imposition of duty and tax under Section 80 of the Customs Act, 1969 and deprived him of any such right after the order passed by the competent officer for his approval. Applicants should be supported. A number of reasons and grounds for failure to do so will be responsible for the loss of information, if any, available with the Director of Customs Intelligence and Investigation, the Department of Diagnostics may be provided to the Department In order to identify those involved in the military. Applicants have higher levels of evaluation with the applicant female advocates from Dudial lawyer