MULTAN: Collectorate of Customs has raised serious concerns regarding a recent ruling by the Customs Appellate Tribunal, which allegedly ignored legal precedents set by the High Court and Supreme Court, according to a customs appellate bench.
The bench was hearing nine Special Custom References (SCRA) filed by the Director of Intelligence & Investigations (DIT), Multan, through Advocate Khalid Bajwa against M/s Burki & Co, challenging the judgment in Customs Appeal No. K-121 of 2017 and others.
The case involves the alleged illegal import and disposal of Hino Prime Movers in violation of the terms and conditions of Para 9 (ii) (1) & (5) of the Import Policy Order 2013-15.
According to details, the respondent importers misused the facility granted for the import of Prime Movers, which were subsequently detained and seized by Customs.
The respondents filed Constitution Petition No. D-7925 of 2015, which was dismissed by the SHC via judgment dated 26.04.2016, directing the department to investigate how these Prime Movers were released. The respondents then challenged the SHC order before the Supreme Court, which refused leave and upheld the SHC’s decision.
During proceedings of the SCRA, the bench noted that despite findings against the respondents, adjudication proceedings continued. A Show Cause Notice was issued and was decided through an Order-in-Original dated 05.01.2017. Subsequently, the respondents approached the Customs Appellate Tribunal, which ruled in their favor.
The bench confronted the counsel for the respondents, who argued that the tribunal had ruled that the Applicant Department lacked jurisdiction, as further proceedings could not take place once the Prime Movers had been released.
The bench disagreed with this argument, stating that the matter had already been settled by the High Court and Supreme Court and that the adjudicating authority had no further role to play.
Allowing the SCRAs filed by the DIT, the bench ruled that the tribunal had made a serious error by revisiting a matter that had already been conclusively decided by higher courts.
