| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2021 SLG 692 2021 SLD 692 2021 PTD 443 |
Punjab Revenue Authority, Lahore
Appeal No. 01 of 2015, decision Dated: 22nd January, 2020
HAROON LATIF KHAN, DISTRICT AND SESSIONS, JUDGE, CHAIRPERSON, IMRAN HAYEE KHAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Petitioner(s) by: Muhammad Naeem Munawar
Respondent(s) by: Muhammad Afzal DR
Appeal No. 01 of 2015, decision Dated: 22nd January, 2020
HAROON LATIF KHAN, DISTRICT AND SESSIONS, JUDGE, CHAIRPERSON, IMRAN HAYEE KHAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Petitioner(s) by: Muhammad Naeem Munawar
Respondent(s) by: Muhammad Afzal DR
M/S FRIGZ FOODS SIALKOT CANTT
VS
COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) PRA, LAHORE
Law: Punjab Sales Tax on Services Act, 2012
Section: 3,5,24,36,63,65
Law: Punjab Sales Tax on Services (Adjudication and Appeals) Rules, 2012
Section: 9,16
(a) Punjab Sales Tax on Services Act (XLII of 2012)----Ss. 24, 63 65--Punjab Sales Tax on Services (Adjudication and Appeals) Rules, 2012, Rr. 9 16--Assessment of tax--Appeal to Commissioner (Appeals)--Decision in appeal--Examination of records, evidences--Duty of Commissioner (Appeals)--Scope--Show-cause notice issued to the appellant alleged that it being franchisee had deposited certain amounts in the Bank account of the franchiser on account of royalty and advertisement, etc--Additional Commissioner, on failure of appellant to file any reply, passed the assessment order--Appeal filed against said order was dismissed--Validity--Appellant had failed to file any reply or submit any documents before the Additional Commissioner, but in total contrast to the admitted fact, the Commissioner (Appeals) in his order had stated that impugned order was passed after taking into account the contentions and documents produced by the appellant before the Additional Commissioner-- Observation of the Commissioner (Appeals) was sufficient to hold that the Commissioner (Appeals) did not look into the record rather the order was passed merely on the basis of his imagination-- Commissioner (Appeals) had mentioned the arguments of the appellant in the opening paragraph of his order but had failed to dilate upon the grounds of the appellant i.e. double taxation, wrong calculation of tax liability and paying of tax by the appellant throughout the period of alleged default--Order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) did not fulfill the requirements of the adjudication rules--Case was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for decision afresh. (b) Punjab Revenue Authority Act (XL1II of 2012)----Ss.3, 5 36--Punjab Revenue Authority, powers and functions of--Validation--Scope--Show-cause notice issued to the appellant alleged that it being franchisee had deposited certain amounts in the Bank account of the franchiser on account of royalty and advertisement, etc. Additional Commissioner, on failure of appellant to file any reply, passed the assessment order--Appeal filed against said order was dismissed--Contention of appellant was that vide of High Court reported as The Institute ofโฆ
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