Case Details

Citation(s)
2024 SLG 228 2024 SLD 228 2024 PTD 275
Islamabad High Court
S.T.R. No. 19 of 2008 and C.M. No. 1054 of 2019, decided on 9th May, 2022. Date of hearing: 9th May, 2022.
PRESENT: MIANGUL HASSAN AURANGZEB AND ARBAB MUHAMMAD TAHIR, JJ
Riaz Hussain Azam Bopara for Applicant. Ibrar Hussain, representative for
Respondent No.2.

PETITIONER(S): COLLECTOR, SALES TAX AND FEDERAL EXCISE, REGIONAL TAX OFFICE, ISLAMABAD

VS

RESPONDENT(S): CUSTOMS, CENTRAL EXCISE AND SALES TAX, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ISLAMABAD AND ANOTHER

Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990

Section: 73

Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990)---S. 73--Adjustment of input tax--Requirement of S. 73 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, non-compliance of--Question was, whether or not, non-compliance, of requirement of S. 73 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 (‘the Act, 1990’) would be sufficient for the department to disallow input tax adjustment and for an order for recovery of the principal amount along with default surcharge and penalty--Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal preferred by the taxpayer against disallowance of the input tax adjustment by Assistant Collector, which order was assailed by the Collector / Department by filing Sales Tax Reference-Validity--Record revealed that Assistant Collector disallowed the input tax adjustment of the respondent/registered person on the ground that the payment had not been made in accordance with the requirement of S. 73 of the Act, 1990-- Section 73 of the Act 1990 required payment of an amount for a transaction exceeding the value of Rs. 50,000/ = however, in the present case, the amount involved was less than Rs.50,000/=--It was not the case of the applicant / department that the respondent was claiming input tax adjustment against fake invoices or had evaded the payment of tax--Section 73 of the Act, 1990 did not prescribe the penalty of disallowing the input adjustment for failure to show compliance with the requirement of S.73 of the Act, 1990---Appellate Tribunal had upheld the penalty of Rs. 5,000/= imposed on respondent for not showing compliance with the requirement of S. 73 of the Act, 1990---Applicant department had failed to give season for interference of the High Court in the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal---Sales Tax Reference filed by the department was dismissed, in circumstances. JUDGMENT C.M. No. 1054 of 2019. Mr. Ibrar Hussain, representative of respondent No.2 has not opposed the applicant for the restoration of the captioned reference. For the grounds taken in the application for the restoration of the captioned reference, the same is allowed and the captioned sales tax reference is restored to its original number. MAIN CASE The questions of law framed by this Court vide order dated 20.05.2009 are as follows:---…
🔒
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