COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, MODEL CUSTOMS COLLECTORATE, BALOCHISTAN versus ABDUL SATTAR
Section 157 (2) and 187 were smuggled by the authorities to prove the principle of the smuggling of ounces, so the goods were confiscated, but the defendant claimed that the goods were owned by the Mirani Dam Project Customs, excise contractor. Purchased at auction. And the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the defendant and directed the issuance of goods and the return of fines, the Customs, Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunals had adopted a valid doctrine with regard to the seized goods, as per the Customs Act. Under 187, 1969, it was up to the defendant to disclose any legal authority or permit or document in connection with the possession of foreign original goods, for the respondents to purchase the goods through a legal auction from the engineering company working on the dam. Successfully eliminated his burden by submitting documents. After the defendant's reasonable explanation, the goods transferred to the customs authority to show that the goods were smuggled by the respondents but no evidence from the Customs Authorities Customs, Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal Or no material was presented, nor any law that requires clarification, authorities refuse to interfere with a customs-approved order. , Excise and sales tax appellate tribunal reference dismissed
Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2012
