Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990

Section: 25,25(1),25(2),51

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 9

Law: General Clauses Act, 1897

Section: 24A

Law: Federal Excise Act, 2005

Section: 45,46,46(1)

JUDGMENT ADNAN IQBAL CHAUDHRY JUSTICE:---.--- The Plaintiffs in all of the listed suits, most of whom are sugar mills, have impugned notices issued by the Commissioner Inland Revenue, some under section 25 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, and some both under section 25 of the Sales Tax Act and section 46 of the Federal Excise Act, 2005, informing the Plaintiffs that they have been selected for audit for various tax periods, and calling upon them to produce record and documents for the purposes of audit. The Plaintiffs have also impugned the consequent follow-up notices issued by the Additional Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner or the Assistant Commissioner Inland Revenue, listing the record and documents required of the Plaintiffs for the purposes of audit. The Plaintiffs pray that the impugned notices be declared unlawful, and that the Defendants, who are, or who regulate tax authorities, be restrained from acting upon the impugned notices. Since the cause of action of all these suits was the same, and all of them raised the same questions of law, all suits were heard together, and I proceed to decide them by this common judgment. 2. The suits listed as Set-I and Set-II, impugn notices issued only under section 25 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990. In Set-I, the impugned notices issued by the Commissioner Inland Revenue are identical to each other, having been issued by the same officer on 02-07-2020, allegedly “on the scrutiny of sales tax returns”. In Set-II, the impugned notices issued by the Commissioner Inland Revenue are similar to each other, issued on various dates in July 2020, but these do not state to have been issued on a scrutiny of sales tax returns, rather the Plaintiffs are simply informed that they have been selected for audit in exercise of powers under section 25 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990. However, none of the impugned notices assign reasons for selecting the Plaintiffs for audit. A sample of the impugned notice issued by the Commissioner Inland Revenue in the suits of Set-I is as follows: “Dated: 02-07-2020 No. SUGAR CASES/AUDIT-25/TY-2017/ZONE-II/LTU/2020 M/s....... Sugar Mills Limited, ........ Karachi. National Tax Number -...... SUBJECT: AUDIT…

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