Case Details

Citation(s)
2021 SLG 2667 2021 SLD 2667 2021 PTD 2024
Lahore High Court
S.T.R. No. 255093 of 2018 decided on 6th March, 2019.
MUHAMMAD SAJID MEHMOOD SETHI, JUSTICE, MUZAMIL AKHTAR SHABIR, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Shahbaz Butt
Respondent(s) by: Ms. Kausar Parveen, Advocate/Legal Advisor

MESSRS SAUDAGAR, EPS INDUSTRIES (PVT.) LTD. THROUGH DIRECTOR

VS

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, AUDIT UNIT-02, Zone-III AND 3 OTHERS

Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990

Section: 3(1A)

Law: General Clauses Act, 1897

Section: 24A

(a) Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990)--S.3(1A)-General Clauses Act (X of 1897), S.24-A-SRO No. 648(I)/2013, dated 09-07-2013-Scope of tax-Further tax- Reasons for decision-Scope- Registered person assailed order passed by Appellate Tribunal and submitted, inter alia, that the charge of further tax under S.3(1A) of Sales Tax Act, 1990 was not examined in its true perspective-Validity-Core issue regarding category I status of sales tax registration of the applicant as manufacturer-cum-retailer, having its retail outlet substantiated through sales tax registration certificate, was not determined by the Appellate Tribunal while passing the impugned order-Such exercise of jurisdiction was not proper- Impugned order was passed in violation of S.24-A of the General Clauses Act, 1897, inasmuch as it lacked valid lawful reasons-Order passed by Appellate Tribunal was set aside and the matter was remanded for re-adjudication through a speaking order-Reference application was disposed of accordingly. Commissioner of Income Tax, Companies Zone-II, Karachi v. Messrs Sindh Engineering (Pvt.) Limited, Karachi 2002 SCMR 527 = 2002 PTD 419 rel. (b) General Clauses Act (X of 1897)--S.24-A-Reasons for decision-Scope-Order passed by judicial or quasi-judicial authority has to be supported by lawful reasons. ORDER Through instant Reference Application under Section 47 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 (“the Act of 1990”), following questions of law, asserted to have arisen out of impugned order dated 05.11.2018, passed by learned Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue, Lahore Bench, Lahore (“Appellate Tribunal”), have been pressed and argued for our opinion:- 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Appellate Tribunal has misdirected itself in upholding the charge of further tax under section 3(1A) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 by ignoring the category/status of sales tax registration of the petitioner as manufacturer cum retailer and SRO No. 648(I)/2013 dated 09th July, 2013? 2. Whether a conclusion drawn on the basis of misreading and non-reading of the evidence and the law is sustainable? 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned…
🔒
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