| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2017 SLG 2819 2017 SLD 2819 |
Lahore High Court
W.P No. 30492 of 2014, Order dated: 27-12-2017, hearing DATE : 15-12-2017
SHAHID KARIM, JUSTICE
Respondents by: M/s Kausar Parveen, Shahid Usman, Liaqat Ali Ch., Imran Rasool, Sarfraz Ahmad Cheema and Tahir Butt, Advocates.
W.P No. 30492 of 2014, Order dated: 27-12-2017, hearing DATE : 15-12-2017
SHAHID KARIM, JUSTICE
Respondents by: M/s Kausar Parveen, Shahid Usman, Liaqat Ali Ch., Imran Rasool, Sarfraz Ahmad Cheema and Tahir Butt, Advocates.
ZAHID SALEEM
VS
FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN & ANOTHER
Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990
Section: 7A(2),38,72B
Law: Sales Tax Special Procedure Rules, 2007
Section: 58A,58B,58C,58D,58E,58E(2)
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 98(2),199
THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: SHAHID KARIM, JUSTICE:---.--- This petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, challenges the selection of the petitioner for audit under Section 72-B of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 (the Act, 1990). In connected petitions, W.P No.32870 of 2014, 32836 of 2014 and 33632 of 2014, the relief claimed is substantially the same and a challenge to the selection of the petitioners for audit has been laid, too. 2. In the petitions W.P No.2430 of 2016, 38946 of 2015 and 7088 of 2017 the act of the Commissioner to set in motion proceedings under Section 38 of the Act, 1990 has been challenged. A common question of law animates these petitions and on the basis of which the challenge has been laid to the acts initiated by the officers of the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) whether for selection of audit or for proceedings under Section 38 of the Act, 1990. That question relates to a particular clause of SRO 592(I)/2012 issued by the Federal Government on 01.06.2012, By the said notification inter alia sub-rule (2) of Rule 58E in the Sales Tax Special Procedure Rules, 2007 was omitted and the challenge in these petitions is merely to that extent to the notification and does not extend to the entire notification as such. We shall therefore confine ourselves to the part of the notification by which sub-rule (2) of Rule 58E was omitted. By this omission, the rights conferred on the petitioners by virtue of section 7A(2) of the Act, 1990 were adversely impacted and the petitioners were exposed to the vagaries of audit and other proceedings in the nature of scrutiny of the record of the petitioners. It is the case of the petitioners that section 7A(2) of the Act, 1990 confers a right of waiver of audit or scrutiny of record in certain circumstances. 3. Section 7A(2), for facility, is reproduced as under:- 7A. Levy and collection of tax on specified goods on value addition. (1) ,,. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or the rules made there under, the 3[Board with the approval of the Federal Minister-in-charge] may, by notification in the official Gazette, and subject to the conditions, limitations,…
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