| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2017 SLG 1042 2017 SLD 1042 2017 PTD 1215 (2017) 117 TAX 603 |
Islamabad High Court
I.C.A. No. 14 of 2014 in W.P. No. 247 of 2013, decided on 7th November, 2016. Date of hearing: 31st October, 2016.
SHAUKAT AZIZ SIDDIQUI, JUSTICE, MOHSIN AKHTAR KAYANI, JUSTICE
Shahid Hamid for Appellant. Riaz Hussain for
Respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Nasim Sikandar and Barrister Qadir Buksh for
Respondent No.3.
I.C.A. No. 14 of 2014 in W.P. No. 247 of 2013, decided on 7th November, 2016. Date of hearing: 31st October, 2016.
SHAUKAT AZIZ SIDDIQUI, JUSTICE, MOHSIN AKHTAR KAYANI, JUSTICE
Shahid Hamid for Appellant. Riaz Hussain for
Respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Nasim Sikandar and Barrister Qadir Buksh for
Respondent No.3.
UCH POWER (PVT.) LTD.
VS
GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, FEDERAL BOARD OF REVENUE AND 2 OTHERS
Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990
Section: 9,74
Law: Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972
Section: 3(2)
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 199
Law: Sales Tax Rules, 2006
Section: 22(6)
Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990)- -Ss. 9 & 74-Sales Tax Rules, 2006, R. 22(6) -Law Reforms Ordinance (XII of 1972) S. 3(2)-Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199 Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court-Intra-court appeal- Maintainability-Sales tax-Issuance of debit and credit note- Adjustment of input and output tax-Condonation of time-limit- Appellant company impugned order of High Court whereby its Constitutional petition was dismissed-Appellant had impugned order of Commissioner Inland Revenue, whereby respondent (OGDCL's) application for condondation of delay in issuing debit notes to the appellant was allowed, which put sales tax liability upon appellant- Contention of appellant, inter alia, was that the Commissioner Inland Revenue had no authority to condone time limit for the respondent (OGDCL) for the debit/credit note, since the same directly affected the appellant-Validity-Perusal of agreement between the petitioner and the respondent (OGDCL) revealed that the said agreement made it mandatory upon both parties to follow the law in letter and spirit and Supreme Court while dismissing civil petition for leave to appeal held that the respondent (OGDCL) had to collect and charge tax from the appellant under a specific head, therefore they rightly applied to do the same-Said agreement showed that it was clear that if there was any dispute between the parties regarding invoice of payment or anything else, they could resolve the same in terms of Dispute Resolution mechanism provided for in the agreement, which provided for, inter alia, mediation and arbitration-Question as to whether appellant was liable to sales tax was already subject to arbitration proceedings therefore, appellant's Constitutional petition was not competent as the appellant could not exercise two remedies at the same time- Constitutional petition was therefore, rightly dismissed-Intra court appeal being not maintainable was dismissed, in circumstances. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: MOHSIN AKHTAR KAYANI, JUSTICE:---.--- Through this Intra Court Appeal the appellant has assailed the judgment dated 27.12.2013 passed by the learned Single Bench of this Court in W.P. No.247/13 whereby the learned…
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