SAEED SHINWARI LTD., AFGHANISTAN versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD
Sections 32, 129 and 156 (1) (14) (64) of the Afghan Transit Trade Agreement, 1965 Public Notice No. 16/2000 (A) dated 30 09, 2000 announcing the malfunction of goods on uncertain statement, error, etc. Transit trade invoices filed. White Paper ?? On physical examination, the equipment was used for cigarette production, not White, for the purpose of writing articles - a description of cigarette paper wigs announced in GD and Afghan Transit Trade Invoices The reduction may be punished under Secs 32 and Section 129 of the Customs Act, 1969, under Cls (14) and (64) of Section 156 (1) of the Customs \ Act, 1969, the valid acknowledgment of the Department that the goods are interim As disqualified, the customs was not. At the port it was specified that these goods were not subjected to the test at the port of entry as per the selection criteria of the computer system, but, all consignments were checked at the external port \ were not specified This was possible because, while permitting transit, GDs and Afghan transit trade invoices were simultaneously filed in accordance with the requirements of Public Notice No. 16/2000 (A) 309 2000, giving the data entry operator all details of GDs and Afghans. Had to feed transit trade invoices, and make the necessary corrections, if there is any contradiction, the documentation clearance agent In the customs house, the diagnostic staff and customs inspection staff at the port were required to identify similar discrepancies, to identify contradictions in the material details of the goods that went through all stages of the customs process. Customs failure at port, neglected by them and
Related judgments — Federal Tax Ombudsman Pakistan, 2011
