Case Details

Citation(s)
2017 SLG 1137 2017 SLD 1137
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue, Lahore
STA No. 1423/LB/2016, Tax period July 2013 to February 2014, May 2014, October 2014 & November 2014, Date of Hearing & Order: 29-05-2017
MUHAMMAD WASEEM CH., JUDICIAL MEMBER, RANA AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Appellant by: Mian Waqas Khalid, AR
Respondent by: Ms. Rabia Shah, DR Appellant by: Mian Waqas Khalid, AR
Respondent by: Ms. Rabia Shah, DR

M/S Rafiq Brother Steel RERolling Mills, Lahore

VS

The CIR, RTO, Lahore STRN 0303721324619

Law:

Section:

ORDER Raana Ahmed (Accountant Member) 1. Facts of the case are that the OIR passed order No.85/2016 under section 11(2) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 dated 26.05.2016, charging further tax @ 1% under section 3(1 A) of the Act, at PKR 4,282,167/- alongwith default surcharge and penalty. The taxpayer filed appeal, against the said order of the OIR, before the CIR (A) vide No. 14 A-II/2016 dated 21.11.2016, who vide order under section 45B dated 21.11.2016 upheld the order of the OIR. The taxpayer filed instant appeal, against the said order of the CIR (A), before the ATIR vide STA No.1423/LB/2016, on the following grounds: 1) That the order dated 21.11.2016 passed by the Commissioner Inland Revenue, (Appeal-ll), Lahore is unlawful, bad in law and against the facts of the case. 2) That the order passed by the learned Commissioner Inland Revenue, (Appeal-ll), Lahore is arbitrary and illegal. 3) That the impugned order dated 06.06.2016 was passed by the respondent No.3 without providing proper opportunity of being heard. 4) That the respondent No.3 imposed tax on surmise base which has no room under law and as such liable to be deleted. 5) That the impugned order passed by the learned Commissioner inland Revenue (Appeal-ll) is without applying the judicial mind. 6) That the appellant manufactures of Mild Steel Products (Saria) which are used for building construction and the same are consumed by the end consumers. As per S.R.O 648(I)/2013 dated 09.07.2013 the provision of sub-section (1A) of section 3 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 is not applicable on the appellant and the further tax @ 1% is also not applicable to supply of goods directly to end consumers. 7) That the sales under consideration were retail sales made to the 'end consumer'. The sales made to end consumers were not subject to Further Tax u/s 3(1A) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 in the light of cumulative reading of Section 3(1 A) read with SRO 648(I)/2013 wherein supply of goods directly to the end consumers have been excluded from the provisions of Section 3(1 A) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990. 8) That the facts and circumstances of the case, impugned assessment order in original and the consequent imposition of…
🔒
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