FAISALABAD DRY PORT TRUST, THROUGH MANAGER (ADMN. & LEGAL) versus ASSISTANT COLLECTOR CUSTOMS AND 4 OTHERS
Sections 82, 82A, 203, 201 and 169 (5) of the Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitutional application, hearing on the applicant's department regulation regarding storage of seized / unnecessary goods kept in the dry port. The payment, the dry port, was that such storage for seven days was permissible but beyond that it was reasonable to pay the rent and that the other ports of the country, especially the country's largest port, There was a canyon for storage. Goods that were not cleared within 30 days under section 82, Customs Act, 1969 Customs Department, Customs Department could not satisfy the court in relation to the demand which the Port / Petitioner raised through a constitutional request. ? The assistance being sought in this regard, when the example of the largest port stood and other ports became relevant and then the senior section of the customs department was the holder. It is obliged to consider the matter and then decide whether the audit object, which was taken in relation to future wage fees, will be paid to the applicant / port and against the call already paid for review. Whether or not to be paid and the audit object was valid The law, past practice and customs provisions of the High Court, 1969, in the circumstances, direct the relevant collector customs to consult their counterparts at various ports. Make an immediate decision on this issue and keep it on the interoffice record. The notice they are receiving from their counterparts for the purpose of the decision is that if it turns out that the audit object was based on erroneous deliberation, it will, according to law, pass it through an order such practice for two months.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
