AGL 38.02 Increased By ▲ 0.08 (0.21%)
AIRLINK 197.36 Increased By ▲ 3.45 (1.78%)
BOP 9.54 Increased By ▲ 0.22 (2.36%)
CNERGY 5.91 Increased By ▲ 0.07 (1.2%)
DCL 8.82 Increased By ▲ 0.14 (1.61%)
DFML 35.74 Decreased By ▼ -0.72 (-1.97%)
DGKC 96.86 Increased By ▲ 4.32 (4.67%)
FCCL 35.25 Increased By ▲ 1.28 (3.77%)
FFBL 88.94 Increased By ▲ 6.64 (8.07%)
FFL 13.17 Increased By ▲ 0.42 (3.29%)
HUBC 127.55 Increased By ▲ 6.94 (5.75%)
HUMNL 13.50 Decreased By ▼ -0.10 (-0.74%)
KEL 5.32 Increased By ▲ 0.10 (1.92%)
KOSM 7.00 Increased By ▲ 0.48 (7.36%)
MLCF 44.70 Increased By ▲ 2.59 (6.15%)
NBP 61.42 Increased By ▲ 1.61 (2.69%)
OGDC 214.67 Increased By ▲ 3.50 (1.66%)
PAEL 38.79 Increased By ▲ 1.21 (3.22%)
PIBTL 8.25 Increased By ▲ 0.18 (2.23%)
PPL 193.08 Increased By ▲ 2.76 (1.45%)
PRL 38.66 Increased By ▲ 0.49 (1.28%)
PTC 25.80 Increased By ▲ 2.35 (10.02%)
SEARL 103.60 Increased By ▲ 5.66 (5.78%)
TELE 8.30 Increased By ▲ 0.08 (0.97%)
TOMCL 35.00 Decreased By ▼ -0.03 (-0.09%)
TPLP 13.30 Decreased By ▼ -0.25 (-1.85%)
TREET 22.16 Decreased By ▼ -0.57 (-2.51%)
TRG 55.59 Increased By ▲ 2.72 (5.14%)
UNITY 32.97 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.03%)
WTL 1.60 Increased By ▲ 0.08 (5.26%)
BR100 11,727 Increased By 342.7 (3.01%)
BR30 36,377 Increased By 1165.1 (3.31%)
KSE100 109,513 Increased By 3238.2 (3.05%)
KSE30 34,513 Increased By 1160.1 (3.48%)

LAHORE: A tyre importer has secured duty after proving that the customs department has assessed the goods in terms of valuation rulings which have already been declared illegal, unlawful and against the Customs Act, said sources.

According to details, the tyre importer had imported tyres of various sizes and filed Goods Declaration (GD) on the basis of the import documents. The assessing officer assessed it under the valuation ruling, which was already declared illegal by a customs tribunal.

The importer challenged the assessment on the ground that the department has assessed the goods in terms valuation rulings which have already been declared illegal, unlawful and against section 25 of the Customs Act.

He added that the said order of the tribunal was still in the field, therefore, binding on the department because it was for general application, and not person- specific. He further maintained that the department cannot pass the assessment in a stereotype manner without giving any valid and lawful reason and evidence.

He also highlighted the discriminatory treatment was extended to by the department in his case since he was denied of obtaining the benefit of the order of the tribunal on the fact that he was a party in the case.

However, the department denied the benefit on the plea that the said order was not for general application but person specific. Since the importer was not part to the case at the relevant time, therefore, he was not eligible to the benefit of the order passed by the tribunal.

But the relevant forum declared that the tribunal while setting aside the valuation ruling had set forth a principle that the valuation rulings in question contained patent illegalities therefore were set aside in general.

Once it was set aside and declared illegal the valuation ruling was to be deemed as ‘not in field’ for everyone importing that category of goods. The forum further maintained that assessment of goods on the basis of the declared transactional values of other importers tantamount to discrimination against the importer by the Customs Collectorate.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2024

Comments

Comments are closed.

SZS Aug 18, 2024 08:20am
So what was the follow-up if any? Was the complainant compensated ? if not when and how? Incomplete stores!
thumb_up Recommended (0)