COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE OF CUSTOMS (PREVENTIVE), KARACHI VS ABDUL SALAM KHAN, 2007 PTD-KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH 2500 (2007)

Customs Act (IV of 1969)---

----S. 196---General Clauses Act (X of 1897), S.24-A---Appeal to High Court---Order of the Member; Technical of the Appellate Tribunal, showed that he had not gone through the earlier orders passed by the lower forums .and other material available on record, which was explicitly referred to and discussed therein---Mere fact that the respondents had failed to appear in response to the notice, Member Technical of the Appellate Tribunal was not supposed to decide the case against them without recording arty valid reasons and without application of mind---Impugned order passed by the Tribunal being violative of provisions of S.24-A of General Clauses Act, 1897, was set aside, with direction t~ the Tribw~al to decide the same afresh.

Raja Muhammad Iqbal for Applicant.

Respondent in person.

ORDER

By this reference application, under section 196 oi' the Customs Act, 1969, the Collector of Customs (Preventive) Karachi, has proposed following questions for the opinion of this Court:--

"(1) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal not .appreciated evidence of proof which were established during the adjudication under section 179 and appeal under section 193 of the Customs Act, 1969 stating that fourteen thousand nine hundred and forty liters Diesel Oil found in the Tanker bearing Registration No.GLT-6665 was smuggled and liable to confiscation in terms of section 2(s), 16, 32 read S.R.O. 374 of 2005, dated 26-5-2005 which are punishable under clauses 8, 9, 19 of subsection (1) of section 156 of Customs Act, 196)."

"(2) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal ignored the hot evidence of record while passing the impugned slipshod order to violate the provision of section 24(A) of General Clauses Act."

2. In the context of two questions proposed in the reference application, we have carefully perused the show-cause notice, dated 17-11-2005 issued, to the respondent; the order-in-original, dated 11-2-2006; the order-in-appeal, dated 28-4-2006, and the impugned order of the Tribunal, dated 19-10-2006 in favour of the respondent. We cannot resist, but to observe that the order of the Member Technical of the Tribunal is highly sketchy as he has not taken the trouble to go through the earlier orders passed by the lower forums and other material available on record, which was explicitly referred and discussed in the two orders. Mere fact that the respondent failed to appear in response to the notice has not given licence to the Member Technical of the Tribunal to decide the case against them without recording any valid reasons and without application of mind.

This being the position, we hold that the impugned order passed by the Tribunal is violative of the provisions of section 24(A) of the General Clauses Act. It is accordingly set .aside with directions to the Tribunal to decide the same afresh. On remand this case should be heard and decided by any other Bench, not the one which has passed the impugned order.

H.B.T./C-15/K??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Order accordingly.