Questions of fact versus questions of law in customs reference proceedings: evidence-based challenges were not referable.

Attempted export of building bricks declared as polyester texturised yarn was analysed on the basis of the appellants' own statements, surrounding documents and corroborative material. The challenges sought to reopen the Tribunal's appreciation of evidence and raised fresh factual grievances, including complaints about natural justice and reliance on statements. Those contentions did not convert the dispute into a referable question of law under the Customs Act. The reference applications were therefore rejected because the issues raised were questions of fact, not questions of law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the questions raised in the reference applications disclosed referable questions of law, or merely questions of fact requiring re-appreciation of evidence.

Analysis: The dispute arose from an attempted export of building bricks declared as polyester texturised yarn. The impugned order rested on the appellants' own statements, the surrounding documents, and corroborative material, all of which had been considered by the Tribunal. The challenges sought to reopen the appreciation of evidence and to raise fresh factual grievances, including allegations relating to natural justice and reliance on statements. Such matters did not convert the controversy into a question of law for reference under the Customs Act.

Conclusion: The questions raised were questions of fact and not referable questions of law; the reference applications were rejected.

---