Case Details

Citation(s)
2018 SLG 1907 2018 SLD 1907 2018 PTD 1574
High Court (AJ&K)
Appeals Nos. 26, 37, 28, 39, 29, 34, 30, 33, 31, 36, 32, 38, 35 of 2001 and 27 of 2002, decided on 22-05-2018.
MUHAMMAD SHERAZ KAYANI, JUSTICE
Haji Muhammad Afzal for Appellants (in all the Appeals). Babar Ali Khan for
Respondents (in all the Appeals).

KH. ZAFAR IQBAL, DISTRIBUTOR LEVER BROTHERS PAKISTAN LIMITED RAWALAKOT (A.K.) AND OTHERS

VS

DEPUTY COLLECTOR CENTRAL EXCISE AND SALES TAX, RAWALAKOT AND OTHERS

Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990

Section: 6,11,22,23,26(1),33,33(CC)34,

(a) Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990)--- ----Ss. 33 & 34---Offences and penalties under the Sales Tax Act, 1990---Default surcharge/additional tax---Imposition of penalty---Exercise of discretion under Ss.33 & 34 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990---Scope---Before imposition of penalty under Ss.33 & 34 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990; the Department must be satisfied that defaulting party/ taxpayer acted deliberately in defiance of the law or was guilty of contumacious or dishonest conduct or acted in conscious disregard of its obligations---Penalty should not be merely imposed because the officer was competent to impost the same and discretion of concerned officer of Department should be exercised judicially and after consideration of all relevant circumstances. Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State of Orissa, decided on August 4 of 1969 Supreme Court of India; Mamy Beverage v. Naseem 1995 PTD 91 and The Collector of Sales Tax, Gujranwala and others v. Messrs Super Asia Mohammad Din and sons and others 2017 SCMR 1427 rel. (b) Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990)--- ----S. 11---Assessment of Tax and Recovery of Tax not levied or short levied or erroneously refunded---Mandatory nature of Departmental obligations under S.11 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990---Scope---Section 11 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 was mandatory in nature and any order passed in non-compliance of the same, particularly an order passed beyond the time period stipulated in the said section, would be invalid. The Collector of Sales Tax, Gujranwala and others v. Messrs Super Asia Mohammad Din and Sons and others 2017 SCMR 1427 rel. (c) Discretion--- ----Public functionary---Exercise of discretion---Scope---Law did not permit an authority to exercise its discretion in an arbitrary or capricious manner. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: MUHAMMAD SHERAZ KAYANI, J:---.--- The supra titled appeals have been filed by appellants, herein, against the impugned orders dated 15.09.2001, passed by Sales Tax Appellant Tribunal, Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Muzaffarabad. 2. As common questions of facts and law are involved in the instant appeals, therefore, same are clubbed and decided through this single judgment. 3. The precise facts of Appeal…
🔒
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