Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD YOUSAF versus ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, KARACHI

Sections 139, 142, 156 (1) and 196 of the Import and Export (Control) Act (XXXXX of 1950), issuing a declaration by the owner of the goods related to section 3 importing goods with reference to the possession of the goods / imported by the appellant. Appeal of the defunct High Court's goods was seized and petitioners were presented with a show cause notice alleging that the carrying of goods as passenger goods in the country, Section 3 of the Import and Export (Control) Act, 1950 (1), except that the production of the import authority was to be presented to the appellant that he inspected the goods. Had disclosed to the officer and had informed him that he had brought the appellant for the goods to be re-exported, in the circumstances discharging his legal obligations under section 139 of the Customs Act, 1969 The officer was satisfied that the goods were not exported to Pakistan for consumption purposes, that such article could be detained at the request of the traveler. The Wing Pakistan Adjudicating Officer confiscated the goods which were in the same trade standard and the appellate tribunal found with no record available that the goods were brought to Pakistan for consumption, as reported by the confiscation. It is reported that the seized officer was satisfied that the goods were not imported into Pakistan for the purpose of customs and the provisions of Sections 139 and 142 of the Customs Act, 1969 were not considered by the Adjudicating Officer under both forums, as well as appellant. The tribunal was obliged to give relief to the appellant. He was entitled under the law and the goods could not be confiscated and the adjusting officer and his famous supreme court advocate from Mehrab Pur lawyer