Case Details

Citation(s)
2013 SLG 331 2013 SLD 331 2013 PTD 834
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue
S.T.A. No. 515/LB of 2012, decision dated: 5-03-2013
JAWAID MASAOD TAHIR BHATTI, CHAIRMAN AND MUHAMMAD AKRAM TAHIR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Mrs. Sadia Sadaf, DR for Appellant. M. Farooq Sh., for
Respondent

Messrs SHAHID CABLE INDUSTRIES, LAHORE

VS

C.I.R., ZONEVIII, R.T.O.-II, LAHORE

Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990

Section: 36,36(3),11(4)

Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990)---Ss. 36(3) & 11(4)---Recovery of tax not levied or short levied or erroneously refunded---Limitation---First Appellate Authority rejected the claim of input tax adjustment and remanded the matter regarding time limitation of order-in-original to the adjudication officer with the direction to communicate the taxpayer evidence regarding extension of time by the Commissioner---Taxpayer contended that order was barred by limitation of time by 120 days as specified under first proviso to S. 11(4) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990; and that admittedly show-cause notice was issued on 3-2-2011 whereas the order was passed on 28-7-2011 which was time barred---Revenue contended that Commissioner vide letter dated 9-6-2011, had specifically extended the time period for passing the adjudication order up to 31-7-2011, the same was within the time limitation as the order was passed on 28-7-2011---Taxpayer contended that limitation expired on 3-6-2011, whereas the extension in time was allowed on 9-6-2011 which was allowed after expiry of limitation and the same had no sanctity in the eye of law---Validity---Order-in-original was time barred as the same was passed beyond the limitation provided under the law---Adjudicating officer was under legal obligation to pass the order within the specified period of 120 days---Show cause notice was issued on 3-2-2011 and the Adjudicating Officer was under legal obligation to pass the order up to 3-6-2011 which he had failed to do as the order was passed on 28-7-2011 which was beyond the time limitation provided under S.36(3) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990---Letter dated 9-6-2011, regarding extension of time for passing the order had no sanctity in the eye of law as the extension was allowed by the Commissioner after lapse of statutory time limitation---Contention of revenue that taxpayer's request for adjournment should be taken into consideration while calculating the time limitation, was without any basis and justification; Assessing Authority on the face of order-in-original had mentioned that no adjournment was sought by the taxpayer---Order passed by the Assessing Officer was not maintainable in the eye of law…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492