MALIK MUHAMMAD QAYYUM, J. - This judgment shall dispose of writ petitions, a list of which is attached, in all of which the vires of the Inspection, Valuation and Assessment of Imported Goods Rules, 1994, whereby a Scheme for pre- shipment inspection of the goods imported into Pakistan was introduced, has been challenged, it may be stated that respondents Nos. 5 and 6 were appointed as Pre-shipment Inspection Companies.
2. It is un-necessary to enter into the controversy as regards vires of the Rules inasmuch as it has been stated by the learned counsel for the respondents and is admitted by the petitioners' learned counsel that the aforesaid Scheme has been discontinued and the contracts in favour of respondents Nos. 5 and 6 have been cancelled. To that extent, these petitions have become infructuous.
3. The only matter which remains between the parties is with respect to the goods which have already been imported into Pakistan.
4. The petitioners' learned counsel has contended that it is the function of the Customs Authorities under Section 25 of the Customs Act, 1969 to determine the actual value of the goods for the purpose of levy of custom duty and other charges and this function could not have been abdicated in favour of respondents Nos. 5 and 6, who were outsiders. The learned counsel have challenged the Jurisdiction of these companies to issue Clean Report of Finding (C.R.F.) on the basis of which the valuation was being determined by the Customs Authorities.
5. Sh. Izhar-ul-Haq, learned counsel for the respondents has conceded that in law it is for the Adjudicating Officer to determine the valuation of the goods in terms of Section 25 of the Customs Act, 1969. He, however, says that it is open to the Authorities to obtain information regarding valuation from any source including respondents Nos. 5 and 6 and that when the Clean Report of Finding is meant for that purpose and has no binding effect.
6. It has been time and again held by the superior Courts in Pakistan that in cases where a dispute arises as to the valuation of the goods being imported into or exported from Pakistan, as the case may be, the Customs Authorities are required to determine the market value of the goods in terms of Section 25 of the Act. These findings have to be based on some evidence and have to be arrived at after complying with the minimum requirement of natural justice. (See Messrs Eastern Rice Syndicate v. Central Board of Revenue & others (PLD 1959 S.C. 364), M/s. Latif Brothers v. Deputy Collector, Customs, Lahore & others (PLD 1992 S.C. 1083) and M/s. United Distributors (Pvt.) Ltd. v. The Government of Pakistan and others (PLD 1995 S.C. 497).
7. As has been conceded by Mr. Izhar-ul-Haq, learned counsel for the respondents, the valuation determined by respondents Nos. 5 and 6 is not binding on the Customs Authorities and the valuation as given in the Clean Report of Finding is at the most recommendatory in nature. The Customs Authorities are free to arrive at a different valuation, if they are satisfied that the valuation given in the C.R.F. was not correct after due inquiry and on its own merits on the basis of evidence on the record.
8. The learned counsel for the petitioners, however, argued that Clean Report of Finding by itself was not evidence and in cases where the valuation is disputed it is incumbant upon the respondents to disclose the source on the basis of which the valuation has been arrived at in the C.R.F.
9. As already observed, it is for the Customs Authorities to determine the valuation independently and on the basis of the evidence available on the record. While doing so, they can take into consideration the valuation mentioned in the C.R.F. but the same has no binding effect and as to what value is to be attached to the C.R.F. depends on the facts of each case. During the course of holding the inquiry as contemplated by Section 25 of the Act, the Authorities are bound to observe the minimum rules of natural justice, one of which is, that any material which is to be used against a person must be disclosed to him. Similarly, an opportunity has to be allowed to rebut the report or the other documents being relied upon by the Authorities.
10. There are certain cases in which the pre-shipment was not made and the goods were cleared pursuant to the interim orders passed by this Court, in those cases, the Customs Authorities will proceed to determine the valuation in terms of Section 25 of the Customs Act, 1969.
All these petitions stand disposed of in the above terms. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.