C.A. No.95/LB of 2002, decided on 1st April, 2002. Versus C.A. No.95/LB of 2002, decided on 1st April, 2002.

1. MIAN ABDUL QAYYUM, MEMBER (JUDICIAL).----- This appeal is directed against Order-in-Original No. 424 of 2001, dated 24-11-2001 (dispatched on 26-11-2001) passed by the learned Deputy Collector of Customs (Adjudication), Lahore, whereby 1445 yards of cloth of foreign origin detailed in para. 1 of the impugned order (reproduced below) was, confiscated being non-duty paid under section 156(1)/89 of the Customs Act, 1969 read with S.R.O. No.1374(I)/98, dated 17-12-1998 without giving any option for its redemption:----

2. S. No.

3. Description of goods

4. Quantity

5. 1

6. F/O A/S Cloth (Made in Korea)

7. 859 yards

8. 2

9. Silk Cloth (Made in China/Korea)

10. 177 yards

11. 3

12. F/O.Jalio Cloth

13. 55 yards

14. 4

15. F/O Valvet Cloth

16. 156 yards

17. 5

18. F./O Curtain Cloths

19. 173 yards

20. 6

21. Net Cloth in pieces

22. 25 yards

23. Total

24. 1445 yards

2. It was seriously contended before us that the seized cloth was of local origin and that although first two items measuring 859 and 177 yards respectively carried stamps showing it to have been made in Korea and made in China/Korea but these were actually manufactured locally by the local manufacturing units at the instance of foreign importers and the stamps were affixed at the instance of foreign importers.

3. The perusal of the impugned order shows that no attempt was made by the learned Adjudicating Officer to determine origin of the confiscated cloth. The learned D.R. on being asked as to whether the confiscated cloth was got examined from Textile Engineering Institute, Faisalabad to determine its actual status replied in the negative.

4. Keeping in view the facts that the learned counsel for the appellant has raised a serious dispute regarding the confiscated cloth being of local origin and also taking into consideration the fact that the learned Adjudicating Officer did not have the same examined from the Textile Engineering Institute, Faisalabad, we find it to be a fit case for remand to the learned Adjudicating Officer for a fresh decision according to law after hearing the parties and after receiving the evidence which they may like to produce with a direction to have the confiscated cloth examined from the Textile Engineering Institute, Faisalabad in order to determine its origin, after associating the appellant or his representative and a representative of the detecting Agency in this exercise.

5. Order accordingly.

25. C.M.A./733/Tax(Trib.) Case remanded.