| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2015 SLG 1275 2015 SLD 1275 (2015) 112 TAX 332 2016 PTD 589 |
Lahore High Court
W.P. No.7397 of 2012, decision dated: 26-8-2015.
MUHAMMAD SAJID MEHMOOD SETHI, J.
Muhammad Ajmal Khan, Advocate, for the petitioner in W.P. Nos.7397/2012 and 9426/2012. Abid Minhas, Advocate, for the petitioner in W.P. Nos. 23428/2011 and 25362/2011. Shahab-ud-Din, Advocate, for the petitioner in W.P. No. 7986/2012. Wali Muhammad Khan
W.P. No.7397 of 2012, decision dated: 26-8-2015.
MUHAMMAD SAJID MEHMOOD SETHI, J.
Muhammad Ajmal Khan, Advocate, for the petitioner in W.P. Nos.7397/2012 and 9426/2012. Abid Minhas, Advocate, for the petitioner in W.P. Nos. 23428/2011 and 25362/2011. Shahab-ud-Din, Advocate, for the petitioner in W.P. No. 7986/2012. Wali Muhammad Khan
SHV ENERGY PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD.
VS
PROVINCE OF THE PUNJAB etc.
Law: Punjab Professions & Trades Tax Rules, 1977
Section: 4,4(3),4(4)
Law: Punjab Professions & Trades Tax Rules, 1977
Section: 4,4(3),4(4)
Law: General Clauses Act, 1897
Section: 24A
(A) Punjab Professions & Trades Tax Rules, 1977 - Rule: 4, 4(3) & 4(4) - General Clauses Act, 1897, Section, 24A Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Articles 4, 7 & 5 - Constitutional petitions - Companies required to furnish relevant documentary evidence and pay professional tax - Creation of demand through demand notices by Excise & Taxation Officer (Professional Tax)/Respondent No. 3 - Petitioners condemned unheard - Validity - Whether under Rule: 4(4) of Punjab professional and Trades Tax Rules, 1977, respondent authority is under legal obligation to provide opportunity of being heard to assessee - Held yes - Whether since no appealable order has been passed within contemplation of Rule 4 of Rules ibid, appeal cannot be filed against impugned notices - Held yes - Whether suffice it to say that even said notices cannot be treated as orders within contemplation of provisions of section 24A of General clauses Act, 1897 read with Arts. 4 & 5 of Constitution of Pakistan for reason that order required to be passed under Rule 4 of Rules, 1977 must contain reasons and it should be objective and not merely subjective in nature - Held yes - Whether is every case in which or revision lies, authority passing order is required to record findings and discuss material available on record or is there any misreading or non-reading of evidence, or any material fact available on record has been ignored causing miscarriage of justice - Held yes - Whether before issuing impugned demand notices, mandatory, provisions of Rule 4 have not been complied with by respondents, demand notices are declared illegal and without lawful authority and matter is referred back to Respondent No. 3 with direction to decide the same through speaking order and fulfilling all legal requirements - Held Yes. (B) Administration of justice - Act to be done in particular manner - Concept of - Whether it is well settled principle of law that where law requires act to be done in a particular manner, it has to be done in that manner alone and such dictate of law could not be termed as technicality - Held Yes. Cases referred to: Muhammad Jameel Das (W. Gopal Das) and another v. The Pakistan…
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