Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD SAEED AND ANOTHER versus COLLECTOR, CUSTOMS, CENTRAL EXCISE, PESHAWAR

Article 2 (s), 156 (1) (89) and 187 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3) The High Court upholds the order to seize imported black tea in the truck with the applicants while processing the post-remand. Kept. The Additional Collector (judiciary) and the Department of Appeal allowed the observation that tea was foreign to the dispute and that it was brought to Pakistan without payment of customs duty and smuggled. Was purchased from the local market, and there is no evidence to support the allegation that the police seized tea, was a foreigner who was brought to Pakistan on an unauthorized route without payment of duty and Article 2 The definition of smuggling under the (s) was covered under the definition. The department responsible for confiscating the Customs Act, 1969, claimed that the tea was smuggled and confiscated precisely because it was brought to Pakistan without payment of customs duty Appeal was not allowed. To consider these questions, what is the evidence of the origin of the seized black tea that was brought to Pakistan without duty and will be smuggled under section 2 (s) of the Customs Act, 1969? ? Whether the sale of such black tea, which was seized and smuggled as a smuggling, was banned in the open market and banned in large quantities of trade within the country or large. Such will be the possession of such tea on a scale. Proof of this being smuggled. That is, without the initial burden of proving the smuggling role of goods by the Department, under the Customs Act, 1969 property advocate from Kallur Kot lawyer