Saturday , December 5 2020
Breaking News
Home / Breaking News / Collector PMBQ seeks dismissal of petition filed by M/s Dany Technologies & others
Collector PMBQ seeks dismissal of petition filed by M/s Dany Technologies & others

Collector PMBQ seeks dismissal of petition filed by M/s Dany Technologies & others

KARACHI: Jahangir Bohio, Assistant Collector-Law has submitted reply before a division bench of Sindh High Court (SHC) on behalf of Collector of Customs Port Muhammad Bin Qasim and prayed for dismissal of constitutional petition filed by M/s Dany Technologies, M/s Uni Champion Trading, M/s Grerry’s Global Trade and M/s Wajahat Electronics against detention of imported mobile speakers, earphones, mobile chargers, power bank, tablets etc.

According to the reply submitted by Jahangir Bohio Customs Today gets exclusively details, it is most respectfully stated that every “declared value” cannot be accepted as “payable transaction value” to be considered as “customs value” for levy of duties and taxes.

It is also pertinent to mention here that nowhere in section 25 of the act, the words “declared value” has been treated as customs value and it was neither the intention of the legislature nor there is any settled law that every declared value is ought to be accepted as customs value for the assessment purposes rather under sub-section (1) of section 25 of the act, the payable transaction value (which is not in this case) is to be accepted as customs value on the conditions provided there in no “valuation ruling” of section 25-A of the act.

He further stated that is the case, where the importers failed to substantiate their declared value as true paid/ payable transaction value, in normal course, save in the case of section 25-A of the act, after considering the methods of valuation the relevant method of section 25 of the act, is ought to be applied and the goods of the importers are assessed on the basis of 90 days’ available data of similar kinds of goods maintained in terms of section 25(13)(a) of the act, read with rule 107 (a) 109, 111 & 112 of the customs rules 2001.

Customs officials submitted that no right of the petitioners have been violated, therefore, court may be pleased to dismiss the petition.

Earlier, court had directed customs officials to file their respective para wise comments.

During the hearing, counsel for the petitioners argues that petitioner imported consignments of mobile accessories of brand including mobile speakers, earphones, mobile chargers, power bank, tablets etc, some of which have duly arrived at port while some others are due to arrive in a short span of time.

He further argued that petitioners are aggrieved and prejudiced by the illegal and mala fide action of the customs officials, whereby the valuation ruling no 1462/2020 dated August 11, 2020 whereby values of mobile accessories were unilaterally enhanced and fixed at exorbitant values.

Counsel informed the court that petitioner being aggrieved by the arbitrary, illegal and mala fide action of the respondents, who are refusing to allow provisional release in compliance of rules 125 (2) of the customs rules, 2001, whereby the department is required to provisionally release the fresh consignments of the importer even if he has not filed any review petition under section 25D.

Citing chairman FBR, chief collector of Customs Appeasement, collector of Customs Appraisement East, West, Port Muhammad Bin Qasim and DG Valuation as respondents, petitioner pleaded the court to declare that the respondents are liable to release the pending consignments and future consignments of the petitioner on the declared value or by securing differential amount as per court orders.