KARACHI: A division bench of Sindh High Court (SHC) directed deputy attorney general to submit para wise comments of behalf of chairman FBR on a petition filed by importer seeking an order for amending the Import General Manifest (IGM) in terms of section 45(2) of the customs act, 1969 read with public notice no 10/2015 east dated May 06, 2015.
On 23 July 2020, during the hearing, Imran Iqbal Khan advocate for petitioner, Muhabbat Hussain Awan, advocate for Collector of Customs West and Muhammad Nishat Warsi, deputy attorney general appeared before the court.
Muhammad Hussain Awan advocate puts his appearance for customs officials and undertakes to file his vakalatnama along with the reply to the petition on or before the next date of hearing, however, he claimed copies of the petition and its annexures, which the learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to provide him during the course of day.
Learned DAG also sought time to file parawise comments on behalf of the chairman FBR.
Earlier, counsel for the M/s Myco Corporation submitted that petitioner has imported ten consignments of Long March Brand Tyres and filed goods declaration according with law, but WeBOC has not accepted the request of the petitioner due to the reason that the consignee names and addresses in the (IGM) was manifested with the different consignee names namely instead of Zar Mohammad Haydari Ltd and Hamza Ahmed Ltd and hence the WeBOC system has failed to accept the petitioner’s request to file GDs as required to clear his lawful goods in terms of section 79 of the customs act, 1969.
He said that the petitioner has contacted the respondents for making necessary amendment in their system in the following ten consignments against which necessary documents NOCs from previous consignee and undertakings as per public notice 10/2015 were furnished before the said respondents.
He informed the court that petitioner is aggrieved and seriously prejudiced by the actions of the customs officials, who are not amending the Import General Manifest (IGM) in terms of section 45(2) of the customs act, 1969 read with public notice no 10/2015 east dated May 06, 2015 despite fulfillment of all legal formalities resulting to which the petitioner is unable to claim the consignments and file goods declaration in terms of section 79 of the customs act, 1969 and the goods lying at port in incurring huge port demurrages besides other financial container rents etc.
Citing chairman FBR, collector of Customs West, assistant/ deputy collector (Imports/MIS) West and others as respondents, petitioner pleaded the court to declare that non allowing the amendments in terms of section 45 of the customs act, 1969 is against the law, rules and be illegal in the eyes of law.
He further pleaded the court to restrain them from taking any coercive action against the petitioner including blocking NTN.
