LAHORE: A Lahore High Court division bench has ruled that the Customs Act 1969 obligates passengers to truly declare the contents of their baggage, and failure to do so results in penalties and confiscation.
Headed by Justice Asim Hafeez, the bench observed this in a judgement setting aside a decision of the Customs Appellate Tribunal regarding the release and re-export of smuggled goods, including mobile phones, drones, and a PlayStation, valued at Rs140.33 million.
Saleem Badsha and another passenger were intercepted by customs officials at Allama Iqbal International Airport, Lahore upon arrival from Abu Dhabi.
On suspicion of abnormal weight of the trolley and hand carry baggage of the passengers, they were allegedly asked whether they had any banned goods/items or any other items in their luggage, which were liable to customs duty and taxes.
Reportedly they responded in negative, however, upon search, they were found to be in possession of 1,040 foreign-origin mobile phones, 10 drones, and a PlayStation.
Sets aside Customs tribunal order; says passengers must declare all goods
The passengers failed to provide documentation proving lawful import or payment of duties and taxes. The goods were seized under Section 168 of the Customs Act 1969 and deemed smuggled under Section 2(s) and related provisions.
The goods were allegedly smuggled into Pakistan without declaration, exploiting the Green Channel Facility, in violation of the Customs Act, Baggage Rules, 2006, and Import Policy Order, 2020.
Following the seizure, the additional collector customs issued a show-cause notice and passed an Order-in-Original (ONO) on April 20, 2023, imposing fines and duties for the release of the goods.
Dissatisfied with the ONO, the respondents (passengers) appealed to the Customs Appellate Tribunal, which allowed the re-export of the goods under Section 142 of the Customs Act.
However, the customs department challenged the decision through a “Customs Reference Application” filed before the LHC.
Justice Khalid Ishaq, who authored the judgement, found that the tribunal erred in law by relying on Section 142 of the Customs Act without addressing the mandatory requirement of a truthful declaration under Section 139.
He noted that the tribunal failed to determine whether the passengers made a truthful declaration or were provided an opportunity to do so.
He held that the invocation of Section 142, which allows the return or re-export of detained goods, is contingent upon compliance with Section 139.
The judge clarified that re-export cannot be claimed as a matter of right, especially in cases involving misdeclaration or smuggling.
The judge highlighted that the seized goods fell under the category of smuggled items as defined by Section 2(s) of the Customs Act and SRO 1512(I)/2022, which prohibited the import of mobile phones.
The judge regretted that the tribunal failed to address the factual and legal implications of smuggling and misdeclaration.
The judge allowed the customs reference application, set aside the tribunal’s judgment, and remanded the case back to the tribunal for fresh consideration in light of the observations.
The judge directed the tribunal to determine the factual questions surrounding the declaration under Section 139 and the applicability of Section 142 of the Customs Act.
Published in Dawn, August 15th, 2025
