' NASIR-UL-MULK, J.--- This appeal, has been filed by Asif Javaid son of Abdul Salam, under section 196 (as amended) of the Customs Act, 1969 to challenge the order, dated 13-2-1998 of the Customs Central Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Islamabad, whereby the order of the Collector of Customs and Central Excise, Peshawar, dated 27-2-1992 was modified. The petitioner was arrested at Peshawar Airport on 12-1-1990 while on board a flight to Dubai, after Pakistani currency, Rs,2,57,000, and foreign currency of different countries was recovered from him. The total value of the entire currency seized was assessed to be Rs,12,49,821. A criminal case was registered under the Customs Act, 1969. Apart from the criminal proceedings under the Customs Act action for forfeiture of the currency was also initiated and a show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 18-3- 1990. At the conclusion of the adjudication proceedings the Collector, on 1-12-1990, confiscated outrightly the entire Pakistani currency. As regards the foreign currency an order of confiscation was made but the petitioner was, in alternative, was given the option to take it in convertible Pakistani currency through the State Bank of Pakistan at the current rate of exchange on a fine of Rs,4,00,000 in lieu of confiscation. This fine was reduced by Member (Judicial), Central Board of Revenue, Karachi to Rs,2,00,000, on further appeal the Customs Central Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Islamabad on 13-2-1998 further modified the order of the Collector by reducing the redemption fine from Rs,2,00,000 to an amount equal to 10% of the rupee value of the confiscated foreign currencies as it stood at the time when the same were redeemed by the appellant in Pakistani rupees. The learned counsel for the petitioner has raised only one question that although at the time of the seizure of the currency in question removal of foreign currency was illegal but by Notification, dated 26-2-1991 the ban was lifted and, therefore, at the time of issuance of show-cause notice to the petitioner and the adjudication by the Collector the taking of the foreign currency out of the country was legalised.
2. The above argument is misconceived. Whether an act is a crime is to be determined according to the law prevalent on the date on which the act was committed. On 1-12-1990 the removal of foreign currency from Pakistan was not only a crime but such currency was liable to confiscation.
The change brought about by the notification, dated 26-2-1991, legalising such an act would not in any way remove the culpability of the petitioner. This principle is well-settled and there is no room for any further deliberation on the question.
3. As regards reduction in the redemption fine the Appellate Tribunal, while reducing the fine, further took into consideration the change that has been brought about in the law. The learned counsel for the appellant, however, did not seek any further reduction in the redemption fine confined his argument to the legality of the fine.
4. Since an appeal under the amended section 196 lies only on a question of law. This appeal stands dismissed in limine, because, as stated above, the question of law raised does not require determination. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed in limine.