Pakistan Case Law← Search
PTCL 2009 CL.72

Deputy Collector Customs vs M/S. Tradecom Pakistan (Pvt.) Ltd. And

CitationPTCL 2009 CL.72
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition No. 696 of 2008(On appeal from the judgment, dated 20-5-
Date2008-06-19
Judge(s)Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, Sheikh Hakim Ali, Mian Hamid Farooq
ResultLeave granted

ORDER

MR. JUSTICE FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR.- (l) The Embassy of Azerbaijan imported a car Mercedes Benz S-500 Model 2002 after exemption by the Central Board of Revenue from payment of the customs duties and taxes. However, the notional value of 27,000 US $ was shown in the bill of entry of the car. However the car was sold within three years of its import. Therefore in terms of Notification No. S.R.O. 447(I)/04, dated 12th June, 2004 as amended by Notification No. S.R.O. l(I)/2005, dated lst January, 2005, the same was liable to 100% of duties and taxes leviable at the prevailing rate and duties and taxes of value determined in foreign currency at the time of importation. The Customs Authorities determined the value of the car at the rate of 74,244 Euro, prevailing at the time of importation. The respondent challenged the same on the ground that the Customs Department itself accepted the bill of entry showing the value of the car as 27,000 US-$.

Therefore, there could be no question of re- determination of its value. The stand taken by the respondent was accepted by the Lahore High Court, Lahore vide impugned judgment, dated 20-5- 2008 passed in Customs Reference No. 6 of 2007.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner-Customs Department argued, inter alia, that at the time of importation of the car, there was no determination of value of the car as it was exempted from customs duties and other taxes. Therefore, it was for the first time that the Customs Department applied its mind for determination of the real value of the car when the customs duties etc., became payable because the car had been sold to the respondent prior to the expiry of three years' period in terms of Notification, dated 12-6-2004 as amended by S.R.O., dated 1-1-2005. The learned counsel for the respondent controverted the position taken by the petitioner department.

3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we grant leave to appeal to consider the above and other submissions of the learned counsel. Meanwhile, the car in question shall not be resold by the respondent. Since short questions of law are involved, the appeal shall be set down for hearing, on the present record, within a period of six months. However, the parties shall be at liberty to file additional documents with the permission of the Court.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
Disclaimer·Privacy·Terms·Search