Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: SHAFI ULLAH VS Respondent: TOUSIF AHMAD QURESHI, DEPUTY COLLECTOR and 3 others
Court Name: Lahore High Court Judge(s): Nasim Sikandar, Mansoor Ahmed Title: SHAFI ULLAH vs TOUSIF AHMAD QURESHI, DEPUTY COLLECTOR and 3 others Case No.: Custom Appeal No,232 of 2001 Date of Judgment:2001-10-22 Reported As: 2002 CLC 678 Result: Appeal partly accepted
Judgment ORDER ' The appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed by a Division Bench of the Customs, Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal on account of its being barred by time by 318 days. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the revenue. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that learned Tribunal did not consider the prayer for condonation in its correct, perspective. Also submits that the petitioner was defrauded by a member of the bar and being Pashto-speaking he was not able to communicate with public in general or to know that he was being defrauded by his counsel. 4. Having heard the parties we are of the view that in revenue matters the prayer for condonation of delay by a subject must be considered objectively. For, a subject will never gain anything by delaying an appeal or application. Secondly, in such course no valuable right can be said to have arisen to the revenue. Every subject, as against revenue is at a disadvantageous position once a decree has been created against him. 5. Therefore, we will partly allow this appeal and direct the learned Tribunal to reconsider the prayer of the appellant for condonation of delay. 6. .
---
## Page 2
revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.