livelawpk.com - Harassment and Delays in facilitating the Re-Exportation ---

Harassment and Delays in facilitating the Re-Exportation of the Vehicle constitute Maladministration --- FTO directed the Customs Department to return the Complainant’s Passport and allow the Re-Export of Vehicle

3 months, 1 week
101

Islamabad 11-09-2024: In a landmark decision, the Federal Tax Ombudsman (FTO) has ruled against the Collectorate of Customs, Islamabad, for gross maladministration in the handling of a case involving the seizure of a foreign-imported vehicle. The FTO has ordered a fresh investigation under Section 195 of the Customs Act, 1969, and directed the authorities to return the complainant's vehicle while facilitating its re-export.

The complaint, filed under Section 10(1) of the Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance, 2000, involved a Pakistani citizen, Mr. Jamshed Zaree, who returned to Pakistan from Germany on July 19, 2023, with his Jeep WK JLJCF Grand Cherokee and a FENDT Caravan SDAH Wohnvagen. According to the complaint, customs officials at the Taftan Border and NLC Dry port, Quetta, unlawfully detained the vehicles, demanded bribes, and kept them in custody for over four months without issuing formal seizure notices.

Mr. Zaree alleged that customs officers harassed him for refusing to pay a bribe of Rs. 5 lacs and kept his passport and vehicle documents while repeatedly delaying the release of the vehicle. After months of bureaucratic inaction, the vehicle was transferred to Islamabad Dryport, where it was eventually seized for failing to provide the Carnet De-Passage.

In response, the Collectorate of Customs, Islamabad, argued that Mr. Zaree had failed to provide the necessary documents to prove legal entry of the vehicle into Pakistan. The vehicle was detained under Section 17 of the Customs Act, 1969, and later seized under Section 168 for lack of proper import documentation. The department maintained that Mr. Zaree did not qualify as a tourist under Rule 76(c) of the Customs Rules, 2001, further justifying the vehicle's confiscation.

After a detailed examination, the FTO found that the customs authorities had mishandled the case from the outset. The vehicle had been brought into Pakistan lawfully, but due to the complainant's ignorance of the Carnet De-Passage Rules, he was left vulnerable to improper actions by customs officials. The FTO cited the customs authorities’ failure to inform Mr. Zaree of his rights and their duty to facilitate the re-exportation of his vehicle under Section 138 of the Customs Act, 1969.

The judgment also highlighted gross maladministration on the part of the Customs Departments in Quetta and Taftan, noting that officials kept the vehicle without a valid seizure order and failed to initiate re-export procedures. The FTO identified incompetence, negligence, and corrupt practices, leading to unnecessary delays and hardship for the complainant.

The FTO referred to a decision by the (Sindh High Court in CP No. D-6544/2020) and (SCRA 693 of 2019), which addressed similar cases of improper vehicle seizures. These precedents were invoked to support the complainant’s right to re-export the vehicle without penalties or confiscation, aligning with the law.

This ruling not only provides relief to the complainant but also serves as a stern warning to customs officials across the country regarding their administrative responsibilities. The FTO's decision highlights the importance of adhering to legal processes and preventing corruption within government bodies.

This case serves as a significant reminder for customs authorities to maintain transparency and follow proper legal procedures, particularly in cases involving temporary importation and re-exportation of vehicles. The ruling also underscores the critical role of the Federal Tax Ombudsman in ensuring accountability within Pakistan's tax and customs frameworks.