Law: Workers Welfare Fund Ordinance, 1971

Section: 2,4,12

Law: Employees Old Age Benefits Act, 1976

Section: 9,17

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 9,37,38,70(4),73,73(2),142(b),142(c),143 ,165A,260(1)andEntryNo.52ofPartIoftheFou rthSchedule

THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: MIAN SAQIB NISAR, JUSTICE:----------------- These matters involve common questions of law, thus are being disposed of together. The key question involved in these matters is whether the levies/contributions/payments under various laws which were amended through different Finance Acts are in the nature of a tax or not. This would in turn determine whether or not the amendments were lawfully made through Finance Acts, i.e. Money Bills, as defined in Article 73 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 (Constitution). 2. The facts pertaining to these matters are broadly divided into three categories for ease of reference. The first set of facts are that Sections 2 and 4 of the Worker Welfare Ordinance, 1971 (Ordinance of 1971) were amended by Section 12 of the Finance Act of 2006 and subsequently by Section 8 of the Finance Act of 2008 which broadened the scope of the obligation on industrial establishments to contribute towards the Workers' Welfare Fund established under Section 3 of the Ordinance of 1971. The said amendments (and notices demanding enhanced payment by virtue of the amendments) were challenged through writ petitions before various High Courts of the country. It is pertinent to mention that there are divergent views of the learned High Courts on this question. The view of the learned Lahore High Court in the judgment dated 19.8.2011 reported as East Pakistan Chrome Tannery (Pvt.) Ltd Vs. Federation of Pakistan and others (2011 PTD 2643) is that the levy in question was a fee and not a tax, therefore the amendments made by the Finance Acts of 2006 and 2008 to the Ordinance of 1971 could not have been lawfully brought through a money bill, rather should have been brought through the regular legislative procedure under the Constitution. The learned Peshawar High Court, vide judgment dated 29.5.2014, followed suit. Subsequently the learned Peshawar High Court disposed of numerous tax references on the basis of this decision, against which the appeals are before us. We would like to point out at the very outset that as regards those cases in which the revenue authorities/collecting agencies have assailed…