| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2016 SLG 1252 2016 SLD 1252 |
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue, Lahore
STA No. 439/LB/12, STA No. 440/LB/12, Date of hearing: 19-08-2016, Date of order: 05-09-2016
CH. SHAHID IQBAL DHILLON, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. RAANA AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Applicant by: Mr. Farid-ud-Din, ITR.
Respondent by: Mr. Tehseen Muzaffar, DR.
STA No. 439/LB/12, STA No. 440/LB/12, Date of hearing: 19-08-2016, Date of order: 05-09-2016
CH. SHAHID IQBAL DHILLON, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. RAANA AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Applicant by: Mr. Farid-ud-Din, ITR.
Respondent by: Mr. Tehseen Muzaffar, DR.
M/s. Riaz Bottlers (Pvt.) Limited, Lahore
VS
CIR, LTU, Lahore .... --Respondent
Law:
Section:
THIS ORDER PASSED BY: CH. SHAHID IQBAL DHILLON, (JUDICIAL MEMBER):---------------- These two appeals are directed against order dated 07.03.2012, passed by the learned CIR(Appeals-l), Lahore whereby he dismissed the appeals while observing that since the matter pertains to the Central Excise Act, 1944 (repealed) and the authority to hear first appeal was Collector (Appeals) and I am not Collector (Appeals), hence this office is quorum non-judice. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the show cause notice dated 15.04.1986, was issued by the Deputy Collector, Collectorate of Central Excise and Land Customs, Lahore, precisely on the issue of usage /consumption of raw material including beverages concentrate. Being dissatisfied with the replies submitted by the company, the Deputy Collector passed the order-in-original Nos. 137/1993 and 117/1993 both dated 10.03.1993 and the same were upheld in appeal and revision. These orders were assailed before the Hon'ble Lahore High Court, through W.P. No.6889/94 and ultimately the said writ petition was disposed on 27.08.2001 for denovo proceedings. In the denovo proceedings, the Additional Collector after detailed deliberation concluded that the previous order-in-original Nos. 117, 120, 134 & 137/1993, dated 10.03.1993, have been passed according to the law in force at the time and in consonance with the interpretation of the superior courts. Accordingly, she upheld these orders in their entirety vide order dated 20.05.2006. 3. Being dissatisfied, the registered person filed first appeal and the same was disposed of vide above referred order dated 07.03.2012, with the following observations which is now subject matter of appeal before us: - "In Sales Tax Act and Federal Excise Act, 2005 the nomenclature Collector wherever occurring was substituted with Commissioner. However no substitution was made in Central Excise Act (Repealed) therefore CIR(Appeals) is not competent to be dispose of his appeal. The learned AR explained that in terms of General Excise Act (Section 6) the pending proceedings are to be continued and finalized as if the Repealed Act was still alive therefore his case should be decided in accordance with…
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