FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others vs AMJAD HUSSAIN DILAWARI and 2

' RUSTAM S. SIDHWA, J.---This judgment will dispose of the above three appeals preferred by the Federation of Pakistan and others, appellants, against the consolidated judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court dated 6-2-1980 accepting the three writ petitions filed by each of the respondents.

2. Leave was granted in these three appeals as leave had already been granted in Federation of Pakistan v. M/s. M. Afzal & Sons and others connected petitions (C.P. Nos. 138-R to 143-R of 1977) where the question of law involved was identical to that raised in the present cases.

3. Ch. Muhammad Farooq, Deputy Attorney-General, appears for the appellants in all the three appeals. He submits that the Karachi Bench of the Supreme Court has already heard the connected appeals and has reserved judgment. He submits that whatever is the decision in those cases, the same shall be binding in the present appeals.

4. Nobody appears on behalf of the respondents.

5. The decision in the case of Federation of Pakistan v. M. Afzal & Sons and others connected' appeals (CA. 210 to 215 of 1977) was delivered by a Bench of five Judges of this Court on 29-8-1991.

In terms of the decisions in these appeals it was held that where a particular article was exempted from payment of customs duty under section 19 of the Customs Act, 1969, which exemption was later withdrawn, the benefit of exemption was available only in respect of those goods which were imported between the date the exemption was granted and the date it was withdrawn, provided the bills of entry had been filed with the Customs before the date the exemption was withdrawn. In Ali Samrez's case (1986 SCM R 1917), which was a judgment delivered by four Judges of this Court, the said benefit was held to be available if between the, date the exemption was granted and the date it was withdrawn, effective steps had been taken by the importer to conclude his contract with the exporter and open the letter of credit, in terms of his contract, irrespective of the fact that his goods arrived or bills of entry were filed after the date the exemption had been withdrawn. By the rule laid down by the larger Bench in Federation of Pakistan v. M. Afzal & Sons (supra), the rule laid down in Al-Samrez's case (supra) now stands modified and it is not only necessary to show that between the date an exemption was .Granted and the date it was withdrawn, the importer had been granted the import licence and taken all effective steps to conclude his contract to purchase the goods and open letter of credit in terms thereof, but that the bill of entry was also filed by the importer with the Customs before the date the exemption was withdrawn.

6. In the present three appeals, prior to 1-1-1978, the motor cars, the engine capacity of which did not exceed 1300 cc and were not fitted with any optional accessories or gadgets, were granted exemption from duty as was in excess of 95% of ad valorem value vide S.R.O. No,526(1)/76 dated 5- 6-1976. However, on 1-1-1978 the said exemption was revised vide S.R.O. No,21(1)/78 dated 1-1-1978 and motor cars, the engine capacity of which did not exceed 1000 cc and which were not fitted with any optional accessories or gadgets, were granted exemption from duty as was in excess of 75% ad valorem value. It is not disputed that all three motor cars that were separately imported by the three respondents in these appeals had engine capacity which was over 1000 cc and less than 1300 cc and that, after the said motor cars reached Karachi, the Bills of Entry were filed with the Customs after 1-1-1978. In line with the rule laid down by this Court in Federation of Pakistan v. M.

Afzal & Sons (supra), the respondents were liable to pay customs duty and regulatory duty in terms of item No,87.02 of P.C.T., as the exemption regarding customs duty was not available to them.' the decision therefore of the learned Single Judge holding the contrary is illegal and liable to be set aside.

7. For the foregoing reasons, all these three appeals CA. Nos. 202 to 204 of 1985 are accepted, the impugned judgments of the learned Single Judge dated 6-2-1980 are set aside and the orders of the Customs Authorities are restored. There shall be no order as to costs.