AIRLINK 181.89 Decreased By ▼ -1.88 (-1.02%)
BOP 11.18 Decreased By ▼ -0.08 (-0.71%)
CNERGY 8.51 Decreased By ▼ -0.02 (-0.23%)
CPHL 96.00 Decreased By ▼ -0.44 (-0.46%)
FCCL 46.11 Decreased By ▼ -0.06 (-0.13%)
FFL 15.70 Decreased By ▼ -0.05 (-0.32%)
FLYNG 28.25 Decreased By ▼ -0.11 (-0.39%)
HUBC 143.25 Decreased By ▼ -0.19 (-0.13%)
HUMNL 12.90 Decreased By ▼ -0.10 (-0.77%)
KEL 4.59 Increased By ▲ 0.15 (3.38%)
KOSM 5.90 Increased By ▲ 0.13 (2.25%)
MLCF 65.90 Increased By ▲ 1.33 (2.06%)
OGDC 214.19 Increased By ▲ 0.11 (0.05%)
PACE 6.14 Increased By ▲ 0.17 (2.85%)
PAEL 46.93 Decreased By ▼ -0.09 (-0.19%)
PIAHCLA 17.71 Increased By ▲ 0.62 (3.63%)
PIBTL 10.79 Increased By ▲ 0.36 (3.45%)
POWER 12.25 Increased By ▲ 0.13 (1.07%)
PPL 172.96 Increased By ▲ 1.22 (0.71%)
PRL 34.20 Decreased By ▼ -0.32 (-0.93%)
PTC 22.47 Increased By ▲ 0.08 (0.36%)
SEARL 95.35 Increased By ▲ 2.44 (2.63%)
SSGC 42.58 Increased By ▲ 1.75 (4.29%)
SYM 14.15 Decreased By ▼ -0.05 (-0.35%)
TELE 7.25 Decreased By ▼ -0.03 (-0.41%)
TPLP 9.94 Decreased By ▼ -0.07 (-0.7%)
TRG 66.20 Decreased By ▼ -0.45 (-0.68%)
WAVESAPP 9.95 Decreased By ▼ -0.18 (-1.78%)
WTL 1.33 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.76%)
YOUW 3.87 Increased By ▲ 0.08 (2.11%)
AIRLINK 181.89 Decreased By ▼ -1.88 (-1.02%)
BOP 11.18 Decreased By ▼ -0.08 (-0.71%)
CNERGY 8.51 Decreased By ▼ -0.02 (-0.23%)
CPHL 96.00 Decreased By ▼ -0.44 (-0.46%)
FCCL 46.11 Decreased By ▼ -0.06 (-0.13%)
FFL 15.70 Decreased By ▼ -0.05 (-0.32%)
FLYNG 28.25 Decreased By ▼ -0.11 (-0.39%)
HUBC 143.25 Decreased By ▼ -0.19 (-0.13%)
HUMNL 12.90 Decreased By ▼ -0.10 (-0.77%)
KEL 4.59 Increased By ▲ 0.15 (3.38%)
KOSM 5.90 Increased By ▲ 0.13 (2.25%)
MLCF 65.90 Increased By ▲ 1.33 (2.06%)
OGDC 214.19 Increased By ▲ 0.11 (0.05%)
PACE 6.14 Increased By ▲ 0.17 (2.85%)
PAEL 46.93 Decreased By ▼ -0.09 (-0.19%)
PIAHCLA 17.71 Increased By ▲ 0.62 (3.63%)
PIBTL 10.79 Increased By ▲ 0.36 (3.45%)
POWER 12.25 Increased By ▲ 0.13 (1.07%)
PPL 172.96 Increased By ▲ 1.22 (0.71%)
PRL 34.20 Decreased By ▼ -0.32 (-0.93%)
PTC 22.47 Increased By ▲ 0.08 (0.36%)
SEARL 95.35 Increased By ▲ 2.44 (2.63%)
SSGC 42.58 Increased By ▲ 1.75 (4.29%)
SYM 14.15 Decreased By ▼ -0.05 (-0.35%)
TELE 7.25 Decreased By ▼ -0.03 (-0.41%)
TPLP 9.94 Decreased By ▼ -0.07 (-0.7%)
TRG 66.20 Decreased By ▼ -0.45 (-0.68%)
WAVESAPP 9.95 Decreased By ▼ -0.18 (-1.78%)
WTL 1.33 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.76%)
YOUW 3.87 Increased By ▲ 0.08 (2.11%)
BR100 12,625 Increased By 108.6 (0.87%)
BR30 38,078 Increased By 125.2 (0.33%)
KSE100 117,764 Increased By 862.6 (0.74%)
KSE30 36,284 Increased By 351.5 (0.98%)

LAHORE: The customs department has failed to establish smuggling of local currency to Afghanistan from a passenger at NLC Passenger/ Baggage Departure Hall, Customs Station, Torkham, said departmental sources.

They said the staff of customs seizing agency had overcome a passenger on his way from Pakistan to Afghanistan with huge amount of Pakistani currency concealed in a pillow being carried by him. On query, the passenger failed to produce any documentary evidence or lawful possession of the seized currency.

Accordingly, the department took the amount into custody for being in violation of sections 2(s), 16 and 139 of the Customs Act, 1969 read with section 3(1) of Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1950 and Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 read with State Bank notification number F.3.2/2017-SB.

However, the appellate forum ordered to release the seized currency as the currency was not intended to be smuggled to Afghanistan nor presence of any picture of the CCTV cameras installed in the NLC Baggage Departure Hall was brought on the record to suggest that the passenger was actually involved in the snuggling of the seized currency. Likewise, the department could not bring on record a copy of passport showing that a visa was imposed by the concerned Consulate.

Since the department had ignored a number of legal requirements while confiscating the controversial amount, therefore, the seized currency was ordered to be released at the initial stage and challenging of the same at the appellate forums failed to bring desired results, they added.

According to the sources, the department had failed to seize the money in accordance with section 168 of the Customs Act. Furthermore, the passenger was not allowed to avail the opportunity of declaration under section 139 of the Act by the department as well. The department preferred to simply issuing a show cause to the passenger without providing him the opportunity of declaration, they stressed.

Therefore, said the sources, the department was unable to price his case even before the Collector Customs (Adjudication) who vide order-in-original released the currency, followed by upholding the same by the subsequent appellate forums.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2024

Comments

Comments are closed.