AL-HAMRA TRADING COMPANY versus SECRETARY REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD
Section 25, 80, 81, 168, 216 and 217 Customs Rules, 2001, R 389 Establishment of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance Office (XXV of 2000), Section 2 (3), Customs of 9, 10 and 11 Goods Assessment of False Declaration of Goods Forfeiture of goods, under the complaint, a shipment declared as yellow sulfur clay was imported under the H section code 2503 0000 and the substance was sulfur powder 999% pure (Midas S.) P25) listed under H Section Code 2802 0010. Shocks were originally issued on false declarations and video order charges, when the complainant originally filed an appeal against the order, the collector (appeal), while accepting the appeal, rejected the penalty of redemption and the grounds thereof. Order to release the goods on. The declared value complainant filed a complaint with the plea that the goods were first detained and then fined for violation of R 389 of the Customs Rules 2001. In the absence of a report from the laboratory of issuing showcase notices to the complainant on the basis of its accuracy test report, neither the adjudicating officer nor the complainant was provided with evidence nor in fact It was mentioned that when samples of the material were sent to the laboratory, release of show cause and judgment without the presence of any evidence or information from the laboratory, discharge from the principles and procedures established by section 81 of the Customs Act 1969 In such a situation, to avoid delays in the release of goods and to avoid port and container charges Application should be made to protect the complainant from any loss due to the detention of the goods
Related judgments — Federal Tax Ombudsman Pakistan, 2011
