Case Details

Citation(s)
2023 SLG 92 2023 SLD 92 2023 TAX 332
Sindh High Court
SCRA 282 of 2010 decided on 30.01.2023, Date /s of hearing: 30.01.2023
MUHAMMAD JUNAID GHAFFAR AND AGHA FAISAL, JJ.
Mr. Anwar Kashif Mumtaz, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. Qazi Ayazuddin Qureshi Assistant Attorney Sindh and Mr. Khaleeq Ahmed, Advocate for the
Respondents.

PETITIONER(S): TRANS WORLD INTERNATIONAL INC (TWI)

VS

--Respondent(S): CUSTOMS, FEDERAL EXCISE, SALES TAX TRIBUNAL, OTHERS

Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990

Section: 11

SALES TAX ACT, 1990 (VII OF 1990) Section: 11 - SRO. 593(I)/91, dated 30.06.1991 - Assessment of tax and recovery of tax not levied or short levied or erroneously refunded - Exemption - Claim of - Import of television cameras and equipment - Release of consignment on undertaking that importer will produce exemption certificate within 15 days - Failure to produce certificate - Passing of order-in-original - Dismissal of appeal up to Appellate Tribunal - Reference to High Court - FACTS Applicant imported television, cameras and equipment, but failed to produce exemption certificate - Appeals were dismissed - Importer filed a reference application in High Court - The question for determination herein is as follows: “Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the applicant was entitled to exemption from payment of income tax under clause (v) of SRO 593(I)/91” DECISION (a) Section: 11 - SRO. 593(I)/91, dated 30.06.1991 - Exemption, entitlement - Import of Television Cameras, equipment - Claim of exemption from duty and taxes under SRO. 593(I)/91 - Scope - Clause (v) of SRO 593 provided for exemption to “persons who import plant or machinery for execution of a contract with the Federal Government or a Provincial Government and produce a certificate from the Government”. (b) Reference to High Court - Despite our repeated queries, the applicant’s counsel remained unable to demonstrate the import of any plant and machinery in the execution of any contract with the Government and furthermore failed to demonstrate the existence of any pertinent exemption certificate. Under such circumstances, it is patently clear that the applicant’s counsel remained unable to persuade us to take any view inconsistent with that maintained by the three consecutive forums of adjudication. Therefore, in in view of the foregoing, we do hereby answer the question framed for determination herein in the negative, in favor of the respondent department and against the applicant. This reference application is disposed of accordingly. JUDGMENT AGHA FAISAL, JUSTICE:---.--- The applicant is aggrieved by concurrent judgments, of three consecutive statutory forums of adjudication, rendered there…
🔒
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