Pakistan has many research lab related to metallurgical engineering.I really doubt why will Pakistan want to import chinese armour.and much harder to digest why will china export us there armour blueprint.
Even if you have a lot of labs do not mean they can design something proper just yet. Sometimes it is better to import before own scientific base can come up with something that fullfill requirements.
And it is not something difficult why Chinese would not offer their product, reason is good... money.
he best they can do us is to help us in our own armour development project.as H khan said i dont know why they dont want to give official name to pakistani armour like chobham or indian kanchan.
Again, "Chobham" armor is creation of some journalist. British and American special armors developed after WWII never had codenames. Codenames were given only to research and development programs, for example "Chopper", "Burlington", "Starflower". Only within program "Burlington", dr. Harvey and his team, developed several different types of composite armors, with different projectile defeating mechanism etc. Nobody even know wich design in the end was choosen by British Army, which design was choosen for further development by US Army and later included in to M1 Abrams program, nobody even knows which of these several armor designs were later choosen for export purposes, and was presented both to European NATO allies, as well as to customers like Iran, that were wanting to purchase tanks like FV4030 Shir Iran 2 which later after slight redesigning and adaptation was renamed FV4030/4 Challenger 1.
On the other hand I must say it was a briliant disinformation, that people started to discuss about new armor in some unofficially created codename and were thinking that all NATO tanks use exactly the same design, where in reality whole subject is far more interesting and not that simple, also taking in to consideration a further evolution of these armors.
And it is even funny, when some countries, create some codename, and claim "hey we have a "Chobham" like armor as well!".
I don't know, maybe this is just a cultural difference, that in some places of this world, people new to some developments, like to claim they reached the level of more experienced countries.
For example in my country, we also had developed 3 types of composite armors, codenamed CAWA-1, CAWA-1NA and CAWA-2. CAWA-2 was developed for main battle tanks. In configuration for a T-72M1 tanks frontal hull armor, CAWA-2 offered protection equivalent of approx ~500-550mm RHA against APFSDS ammunition. But I never saw, even once in any serious publication, anyone, even chief engineer that lead the team that developed these armor or other types of protection in my country, that we all the sudden developed something comparable in 1990's to Americans, Germans or British. So honestly, I do not understand such type of claims.
Because china major threat is from arjun and t-90..both are seriously inferior to type 99 series..
I say, Chinese ZTZ-99 is tank full of flaws, even more than Arjun or T-90, and is preaty much stupidly designed, unnececary big hull, larger turret, makes it heavier, while it's armor protection at best represent level of T-72B or basic T-90 with cast turret.
You should not listen to Chinese propaganda.
T-90 is almost comparable but we all know the one exported to india has inferior kanchan armour not russian,Problems with Thermal imagers,Inferior Gun,or in short a downgraded tank.
Why do you think so? Any proof that "Kanchan" is worse than Chinese designs? There are no problems with TIS, or no inferior gun, especially that Chinese ZPT-98 is nothing special, just clone of 2A46M, which is older design than more modern 2A46M-4 or 2A46M-5.
So against the threat the chinese has there existing tanks are more of an over kill.
No, you are wrong, and it is fairly easy to defeat Chinese tanks due to their inadequate protection, even with Carl Gustav 84mm recoilles rifle firing at poorly protected hull sides.
Of cource it can be coincidence... 
