Case Details

Citation(s)
2017 SLG 1406 2017 SLD 1406 2017 PTCL 864 2018 PTD 527
Appellate Tribunal, Sindh Revenue Board
Appeal No. 17/2013, decided on 28th September, 2015.
MR., JUSTICE (R) NADEEM AZHAR SIDDIQI, CHAIRMAN.
Appellant by: Mr. Muhammad Waseem FCA and Mr. Muhammad Aleem Advocate.
Respondent by: Ms. Anum Shaikh Assistant Commissioner SRB, Karachi Unit XII.

M/S. APM TERMINALS PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD., KARACHI

VS

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONERSRB-VI SINDH REVENUE BOARD, KARACHI.

Law: Sindh Sales Tax on Services Act, 2011

Section: 3,24,24B,Second Schedule

RESULT: Appeal is allowed. INTERPRETATION OF STATUTE Interpretation of charging section and schedule.- It is a trite law that in case of inconsistency between the charging section and the Schedule the Schedule is to yield to the Act. It was further held that it is a binding rule of construction that before taxing a person it must be shown that he falls under the charging section as no tax could be imposed by way of implication simpliciter. If a person has to be brought within the ambit of the charging section by clear words otherwise he cannot be taxed at all. It is also a trite law that Schedules are an aid to the charging sections and cannot be applied in derogation of the main section. It is further a trite law that in case of any conflict between the main provision and the schedule the main provision shall always prevail and has to be given preference over the schedule. The Schedule helps to determine the ambit of charging section since they both constitute on integrated code. The charging section deals with chargeability of something and the schedule deals with the rate of such chargeability meaning thereby that they both come hand in hand together. The word "or" is a disjunctive particle.-See Section 3, and Second Schedule-Part B-Tariff Heading 9809.0000. SINDH SALES TAX ON SERVICES ACT, 2011 Section 3, and Second Schedule-Part B-Tariff Heading 9809.0000. Since the furnishing supplies alone cannot be taxed for invoking 9809.0000 it is necessary that 'composite services' i.e. those including the elements of both "providing or rendering" execution of work and furnishing supplies should be present. The case is remanded to the Assistant Commissioner to determine the nature of service provided or rendered by Appellant and to determine proper Tariff Heading under which the services provided by Appellant.-The core issue involved in this appeal is the proper classification of the services provided by the appellant. Unless the proper nature, scope and classification of services provided or rendered by the appellant is determined the question of levy of tax cannot be decided. The Tariff heading 9809.0000 is a general heading to cover contractual execution of work…
🔒
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