KARACHI: The Sindh High Court (SHC) directed customs officials and deputy attorney general to make sure filing of their comments on a constitutional petition filed by M/s O.S. Corporation against disputed valuation of prime quality hot-dipped galvanized steel coils imported from China.
Order came on October 18, 2018, while the hearing of petition, a two-member bench, headed by Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, heard the matter for next date of hearing.
During the hearing, counsel for the petitioner stated that petitioner has imported a consignment to contain prime quality hot-dipped galvanized steel coils from China vide letter of credit and other shipping documents including mills test certificate, being evidence of ‘prime’ quality of the imported goods, whereas, no such testing is conducted for ‘secondary quality goods’.
He submitted that during the examination, consignment was declared as prime quality, however, customs officials assessed the subject consignment as secondary quality on the basis impugned public notice no 02/2018 dated 09/08/2018 issued by the chief collector of customs appraisement South, which provides vide its clause II (ii) (a) that the mill test certificate must confirm the heat number of the imported coils, which is missing in the attached mill test certificate.
He argued that the petitioner submitted its reply and informed them that ‘heat number’ is only provided in the mill test certificates, where the consignment is ‘hot rolled steel coils’, the very basic material (raw material) which is processed through ‘heating’ whereas, the subject consignment is further passed through the process of ‘galvanizing’ in which, the heating process is not required by the manufacturing mills, hence, the same is not provided under the mill test certificate.
Citing chairman Federal Board of Revenue, the Chief Collector of Customs Appraisement South, Collector of Customs Appraisement East as respondents, petitioner pleaded the court to declare that impugned public notice is ultra vires to the customs general order no 15/2017 and a nullity in the eyes of law as has been issued for irrelevant and inapplicable standards of assessment of the consignment being ‘secondary quality’ hence, same in not applicable in the case of the petitioner, the same may be annulled.
