Case Details

Citation(s)
2015 SLG 793 2015 SLD 793 (2015) 111 TAX 287 2015 PTD 1330 2015 PCTLR 473
Lahore High Court
STR No. 20 of 2011, decided 24-2-2015
MUHAMMAD FARRUKH IRFAN KHAN AND SHAHID, JAMIL KHAN, JJ
Agha Muhammad Akmal Khan and Tariq Manzoor Sial, Advocates along with Syed, Bahadar Ali, Additional Commissioner Inland Revenue, Multan, for the Applicant. Mian Abdul Basil, Advocate, for the
Respondent

COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE

VS

MS. MEHRAN TRADERS

Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990

Section: 3,5(2),5(6),8B,10(3)

Sales Tax Act, 1990 (VII of 1990) - Sections: 3, 5(2), 5(6), 8B & 10(3) - Refund of input tax - Claim of registered persons based on fake flying invoices - Passing of single order by Taxation officer and its application on different registered persons for the recovery of paid refund - Concurrent Endings of authorities below - Tax fraud - Knocking down action against alleged tax fraud by Appellate tribunal on technical ground - Validity - It is contended that attempt to ascertain facts about production of documents, during audit proceedings remained unsuccessful because Appellate Tribunal had not examined order-in-original properly, that registered person 's appeal was allowed because department had failed to show authorization for conducting audit and that case before Appellate Tribunal was of tax fraud - Synopsis - Whether Appellate Tribunal is not exercising its jurisdiction in accordance with law in cases involving allegations of bogus refund claims or tax fraud based on fake flying invoices - Held yes - Whether any opinion on law, by Appellate Tribunal would lose credence for consideration by High Court in advisory jurisdiction, findings of fact arrived at by it are not trustworthy - Held yes - Whether Appellate tribunal is required to keep balance, to ensure issuance of refund to registered person in accordance with law and to protect issuance of fundamental claims which are based on fake and flying invoices - Held yes - Whether under sub-section (3) of section I0, where there is reason to believe that a person has claimed refund which was not admissible to him, proceedings for recovery of same are to be completed within sixty days after due inquiry, audit or investigation regarding its admissibility - Held yes - Whether Appellate Tribunal has failed to notice that how Taxation officer could apply single order on different registered persons for recovery of paid refund - Held yes - JUDGMENT The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Shahid Jamil Khan, J - This judgment shall also decide STR Nos. 21 and 24 of 2011, as orders of Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue ("Appellate Tribunal"), in all these applications, are based on a single order-in-original…
🔒
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