AMIR KHAN through Zia-ud-Din Chaman VS SUPERINTENDENT CUSTOMS (IMPORT) CUSTOMS DRY PORT, FAISALABAD, 2007 PTD-LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE 2480 (2007)

Customs Act (IV of 1969)---

----Ss. 194 & 196---Appeal before Appellate Tribunal---Objection of appellant that Member (Technical) of the Tribunal should refuse to hear appeal for he as Collector had passed order challenged in appeal after issuing show-cause notice to the appellant---Dismissal of appeal by Tribunal without deciding such objection---Validity---Appellant's such contention was mentioned in the order of Tribunal, but same was not adjudicated upon---Department had not opposed such objection of appellant---High Court set aside impugned order and remanded case to .Tribunal for its decision afresh after hearing both parties.

Mian Abdul Ghaffar for Petitioner.

M. Nawaz Cheema for Respondent.

ORDER

This appeal under section 196 of the Customs Act, 1969 is directed against the order and judgment of the Tribunal dismissing the appeal filed by the present appellant. It is inter alia contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that Hafiz Muhammad Anees who was a Member Technical of the Tribunal, which passed the impugned order was also the Collector of Customs, Faisalabad under whose direction the show-cause notice was issued to the appellant, initiating the proceedings culminating in the impugned order of the Tribunal. It is contended that the propriety demands that Hafiz Muhammad Anees should have recused himself from hearing the appeal. He became a Judge in his own cause. Furthermore justice should not only be done but also appear to have been done. The learned counsel for the Department has frankly conceded that in the instant case it could perhaps have been proper for the appeal to be heard by the Tribunal of which Hafiz Muhammad Anees was not a Member.

It has been noticed that the contentions of the learned counsel for the appellant as to the impropriety of Hafiz Muhammad Anees hearing the case are mentioned in the impugned order but the same were not adjudicated upon. Furthermore the learned counsel for the Department has not contested the contentions raised in his behalf by the counsel for the appellant.

In this view of the matter the impugned order is set said, the case is remanded to the Tribunal for decision afresh after hearing both the parties. The appeal is accepted in the above terms.

S.A.K./A-183/LCase remanded.