| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2015 SLG 11 2015 SLD 11 2015 PTD 1 2014 PTCL 710 |
Lahore High Court
I.C.A. No.79 of 2014 in Writ Petition No.29138 of 2013,heard on 22-05-2014
SYED MANSOOR ALI SHAH, JUSTICEATIR MAHMOOD, JUSTICE
Shahbaz Butt and Khurram Shahbaz Butt for Appellant. Ch. Muhammad Zafar Iqbal assisted by Abdul Latif Tariq and Muhammad Yahya Johar for
Respondents. Raja Ashfaq, Deputy Commissioner, RTO-I, Zone-I, Lahore
I.C.A. No.79 of 2014 in Writ Petition No.29138 of 2013,heard on 22-05-2014
SYED MANSOOR ALI SHAH, JUSTICEATIR MAHMOOD, JUSTICE
Shahbaz Butt and Khurram Shahbaz Butt for Appellant. Ch. Muhammad Zafar Iqbal assisted by Abdul Latif Tariq and Muhammad Yahya Johar for
Respondents. Raja Ashfaq, Deputy Commissioner, RTO-I, Zone-I, Lahore
Messrs LAHORE ELECTRIC SUPPLY COMPANY LTD. through Director LegalVsFEDERAL BOARD OF REVENUE through Chairman and 2 others
Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990
Section: 11A,11,48
Law: Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972
Section: 3
Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990)--- ----Ss.11A, 11 & 48---Law Reforms (Amendment) Act (VIII of 1972), S.3---Intra Court Appeal---Interpretation of S.11A of the Sales Tax Act, 1990---Phrase "tax due as indicated in his return"; connotation and scope---Contention of taxpayer/appellant was that S.11 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 had a limited application and only if amount of tax due indicated by the taxpayer in the sales tax return was not paid, only then action for recovery under S. 11A of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 could be initiated---Held, that S.11A of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 was neither a dispute settlement provision nor a provision which dealt with assessment of tax but was in fact a special recovery provision akin to S.48 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990---Section 11A proceeded on the assumption that self-assessed tax due indicated in the sales tax return of the taxpayer was correct and final and therefore in case of failure to pay or making short payment of the same, recovery of the differential amount was initiated without further ado and requirement of due process through issuance of show-cause notice was dispensed with---Amount of tax in the present case, was being disputed by the Department, therefore, in such eventuality, statutory assessment was required under S.11 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 and S.11A had no application to the case of the taxpayer---For S.11A of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 to come into operation, only the amount of tax due indicated by the taxpayer was to be considered; and even though the taxpayer was under a legal obligation to file a true and correct return, any alleged violation of the same could only be resolved through the adjudication process provided under S.11 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990; subject to the selection of the case of the taxpayer under the Sales Tax Act, 1990 and not through the mechanism of S.11A of the Sales Tax Act, 1990---Section 11A of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 was purely a recovery provision; and under said section, the amount of tax due indicated by the taxpayer in the sales tax return was considered to be correct and final and was then used as benchmark to see whether the taxpayer had deposited the said amount of tax along withβ¦
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