ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Spl. Cus. Ref. Appln. No.340 of 2018

alongwith

Spl. Custom Ref. Appln. Nos.341, 376, 377 of 2018,

112 & 113 of 2019

AND

C.Ps. Nos.D-8381 of 2019 & 973, 1343, 1683, 2688, 3689,

3940, 4077, 4078, 4280, 4612, 4651 of 2020

_________________________________________________________________ Date Order with signature of Judge

___________________________________________________________________

PRESENT:

Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi

Mr. Justice Zulfiquar Ahmed Khan

Hearing / Priority Case:

1. For hearing of main case.

2. For hearing of CMA No.2968/2018.

-----------

2^nd November 2020

Mr. Khalid Mehmood Rajpar, Advocate for Applicant in SCRA Nos.340 & 341/2018.

Mr. Muhammad Khalil Dogar, Advocate for Applicant in SCRA Nos.376 & 377/2018 and 112 & 113/2019.

Mr. Zain A. Jatoi, Advocate for Respondents in SCRA No.340 & 376/2018.

Mr. Abdul Moiz Jaferii, Advocate for Respondent in SCRA No.112 & 113/2019 and for Petitioners in C.P. Nos.D-973, 1343, 1683, 2688, 3689, 4280, 4612 of 2020 alongwith Mr.Faiz Khalil, Advocate.

Mr. Ghulam Nabi Shar, Advocate for Respondent in SCRA No.377/2018.

Mr. Muhammad Adeel Awan, Advocate for Petitioner in C.P. No.D-4651/2020 and for Respondent No.25 in SCRA No.113/2019.

Mr. Aqeel Ahmed Khan, Advocate for Petitioners in C.P. No.D-3940, 4077 & 4078/2020.

Mr. Muhabbat Hussain Awan, Advocate for Respondent in some of the petitions.

Mr. Mateen Ahmed, Advocate holds brief for Mr. Muhammad Bilal Bhatti, Advocate for Respondents in some of the petitions.

Ms. Masooda Siraj, Advocate for Respondents in some of the petitions.

Mr. Muhammad Aminullah Siddiqui, Asst. Attorney General.

-*-*-*-*-*-

Arguments of all the learned counsel for the parties in the above Special Customs Reference Applications and the Constitutional Petitions have been concluded.

On 07.03.2019, following five reformulated questions were proposed by the applicant department, upon which, Notices were issued to the respondents, whereas, vide order dated 19.02.2020 by consent of the learned counsel for the parties, all the above cases have been heard together for final disposal in respect of proposed questions through common order:-

1. Whether the reliance of London Metal Bulletin was the right way to determine the valuation of the item so imported in absence of any specific value available locally?

2. Whether the interpretation of Section 25 of Customs Act, 1969 vis-à-vis reliance on the London Metal Bulletin is a sufficient compliance of Section 25 of Customs Act, 1969?

3. Whether the case law cited by the Appellate Tribunal as passed in SCRA 744 of 2016 [D.G. Customs Valuation and another Vs. Messrs Al Amin Cera (now reported as 2019 PTD 301)] has any relevance to the present case?

4. Whether the judgment as reported in PTCL 2014 CL 537 relied upon by the Appellate Tribunal has any relevance to the present case?

5. Whether the concept of method of taking the average price reported in the London Metal Bulletin in any way illegal and whether the dispute in hand in any way concerned Primary and Secondary quality of goods?

For the reasons to be recorded later on, the above proposed questions are answered in the following manner: -

“Questions Nos.1 and 2 are answered in ‘Negative’ against applicant and in favour of respondents. Whereas, Questions Nos.3, 4 and 5 are answered in ‘Affirmative’ against applicant and in favour of respondents. Respondents’ consignments are, therefore, are to be assessed on transactional value in accordance with law. The surety furnished by the respondents may be discharged.”

Consequent upon the decision in the aforesaid Spl. Custom Reference Applications, the above connected Constitution Petitions are disposed of accordingly alongwith listed application(s).

J U D G E