PARAMOUNT INTERNATIONAL (PVT.) LTD., KARACHI versus PAKISTAN THROUGH SECRETARY REVENUE DIVISION CHAIRMAN FEDERAL BOARD OF REVENUE, ISLAMABAD
Section 179, 193, 194 A & 195 Section RO 886 (I) / 2012 Dated 18 7 2012 Constitution of Pakistan, Article 199 Constitutional Petitioner / Cigarette Filter Rods to Reopen Reasonable Case Approved by Authorization Authority The manufacturer's shipment was submitted along with a showcase notice seeking the plug repaper and the same petitioner / manufacturer's clearance, alleging that the imported goods could not be imported freely. And because of the provisions of the Adjustment Authority of the Import Policy Order, the matter is decided in favor of the applicant / manufacturer. And instead of releasing the goods in question, the collector opened the case and after giving another show cause notice, confiscated the goods and ordered the fines to be imposed. The applicant was of the view that the first order was actually competent and if If the collector was not satisfied, he needed to file an appeal against it, so the second order on the decision-making case was not legal. The decision was an independent process of accuracy, and cannot be monitored, tested, nor reopened by the collector, who was acting as an executive or administrative collector in the subject. By the issuance of Section RA 886 (I) / 2012 dated 18 7 2012, section 179 of the Customs Act, 1969 was amended and an independent decision of the cases was introduced in the year 2012 under which new under section 194A was introduced. The Customs Act, 1969, under the amendment, if the officer of the department or customs, is distressed by a decision or order passed by an officer of the Customs Officer under the Additional Collector, the first appeal before the Collector (s) ?
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2014
