Case Details

Citation(s)
2018 SLG 53 2018 SLD 53 2018 PLJ 194
Lahore High Court
I.C.A. No. 1219 of 2016, decided on 10.10.2017. Date of hearing: 10.10.2017.
SHAHID, JAMIL KHAN, JUSTICE, MUDASSIR KHALID ABBASI, JUSTICE
Mr. Ali Sibtain Fazli, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. Shazib Masud, Umer Tariq Gill, Hasham Ahmad Khan and Abad-ur-Rehman, Advocates for Appellant in connected matters. Mrs. Asma Hamid, Addl: Advocate General Punjab; Mr. Imran Aziz Khan, Deputy Attorney Ge

M/S. TANDLIANWALA SUGAR MILLS LTD.

VS

PROVINCE OF PUNJAB, etc.

Law: Punjab Excise Act, 1914

Section: 21,131

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 151

Punjab Excise Act 1914-- ----Ss. 21 & 131--Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Art. 151--Constitutional petition--Law Reforms Ordinance, 1971, Ss. 2, 3(2) & 4--Manufacture & Sale of Sugar---License to operate as Distilleries--Imposition of Duty by Government through Notification---Show Cause Notice--Appellants challenged notification imposing duty, contending that same is violative of Article 151 of Constitution of Pakistan, which were dismissed--Challenge to objected to maintainability of appeals on ground Section 14 of Act 1914 provides an appeal from original and appellate order of an excise officer, whereas, Section 15 empowers Board of revenue to exercise revisional powers against any order passed by any subordinate officer--Validity--There are two critically important features of this case, pertaining to maintainability of these appeals--Firstly, that as to whether demand/show-cause notices issued by respondents fall within purview of proceedings in which law provides for an appeal, revision or review against original order as envisaged in proviso to Section 3(2) of Law Reforms Ordinance and secondly, that in case where demand of requisite duty has been challenged along with vires of statute and competence of Province to enact law was challenged and declared as intra-vires by Single Bench of High Court under its constitutional jurisdiction, as to whether Intra Court Appeal in terms of Land Reforms Ordinance, 1972 is maintainable--There are two fundamental qualifications to bring a case within mischief of proviso to Sub Section 2 of Section 3 of Land Reform Ordinance regarding non-maintainability of an Intra Court Appeal--Firstly, that action impugned in writ petition should be a step in proceedings leading to an original and secondly, at least one appeal, revision or review should be available against he original order, irrespective of fact whether such remedy was availed or not--Present case qualifies both these tests as demand/ show-cause notices, impugned in writ petitions, are original orders in case of demand and in case of show-cause notice is a step in proceedings--Undeniably, appeal under Sections 14 or revision under Section 15 of Punjab…
🔒
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