KARACHI: The Sindh High Court (SHC) directed Customs officials to file their comments on a constitutional petition filed by M/s Dawn Leather Industries against detention of three consignments on the flimsy ground that the manufacturing unit of the petitioner does not exist.
On Monday, a two-member bench, headed by Justice Munib Akhtar, heard the matter. The counsel for the Customs department sought time to file comments; therefore, the court granted time and adjourned the matter. The court also directed Customs authorities to make sure filing of their comments on next date of hearing.
Earlier, counsel for the petitioner stated in its constitutional petition that it is engaged in the lawful business of manufacturing-cum-exportation of the articles made of artificial leather to the various markets around the world and also registered as a manufacturer with the IRS authorities. Therefore, considering the conditions of the SRO 942(1)/2009 dated 13/06/2009 in general and condition number (i) (ii) (iii) & (vii) in particular, the petitioner has temporarily imported raw material for export of leather bags.
He argued that according to the condition no (vi) of the SRO 492 (I)/2009, the petitioner as well as other similarly placed importer-cum-exporter are bound to consume the temporarily imported raw material with 18 months, the time limitation can be extended by the collector of customs for further period of six month on payment of surcharge at 1% per month and; thereafter, it can be further extended by the FBR on exceptional circumstances.
He further argued that the controversy, which is matter/cause of this petition, only started, when the deputy collector of Customs (R&D) Appraisement West unilaterally, without jurisdiction and in violation of the provisions of SRO 492(I)/2009, detained three imported consignments of the petitioner on the flimsy ground that the manufacturing unit of the petitioner does not exist.
Citing Secretary Ministry of Revenue, Chief Collector of Customs Appraisement South, the Collector of Customs Collectorate of Appraisement West and others as respondents, he pleaded the court to declare that detention of its consignments completely mis-interpretation of the SRO 492(I)/2009 is illegal without jurisdiction and against the dictates of law, natural justice and they have no power to deny the exemption/concession available to petitioner in same terms and cannot deviate from the practice persisting since the inception/ issuance of said SRO.
Petitioner also pleaded the court to restrain the respondents from taking any coercive action including encashment of securities and blocking of the NTN/ user-ID of the petitioner or create any hurdles for release of the up-coming consignments with exemption of duties and taxes.
