Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990

Section: 2(43A),3(9A),14,46(1),46(1)(b)

Law: Sales Tax Rules, 2006

Section: 4(a),4(b),4(c),4(d),4(e)

SALES TAX ACT, 1990 (VII OF 1990)----Sections: 2(43A), 3(9A), 14, & 46(1) - Sales Tax Rules, 2006, Rules: 4(a) to (e) - SRO 608(I)/2014, dated 02.07.2014 - Definitions - Scope of tax -Registration - Appellant was registered in category of “retailer” since 18.10.2014 - He filed an application for de-registration on the plea that he did not fall in any category of SRO - Application rejected by Deptt. -CIR(A), held that appellant was lawfully registered - Validity- Appeal to Appellate Tribunal - FACTS Brief facts are that appellant was registered in the business category of “Retailer” in the sales tax regime since 18.10.2014. The appellant applied for de-registration of sales tax. Appellant’s application for de-registration of sales tax registration was rejected. The appellant filed appeal before ATIR. On appeal by the appellant this tribunal vacated the order of CIR with direction to reconsider the matter of de-registration. The learned CIR relying upon the verification/survey of business premises report dated 04.11.2022 passed by this Tribunal, has held that the appellant was lawfully registered. The learned CIR rejected the request for deregistration of the appellant. The appellant being dissatisfied again with this order has preferred this appeal. ARGUMENTS Mr. Nasir Nawaz, Advocate attended the proceedings on behalf of the appellant/registered person and Mr. Niaz Ahmed, DR appeared on behalf of the tax department/respondent. DECISION (a) Registration of appellant under SRO is contrary to the report of Tax Deptt. - Hence, to maintain and uphold the registration of the appellant under the SRO 608 is not only legally flawed but is also contrary to the report of tax department’s own officer. (b) Upholding registration under SRO based on area of shop is not legally justified - If the appellant did not fall in any of the categories mentioned in the SRO 608, its registration would have not been maintained hence the order of learned CIR to uphold the registration of the appellant is illegal. In view of the foregoing legal and factual position, the order dated 05.01.2023 is hereby cancelled. The appeal stands disposed of in the terms as narrated hereinabove. (c)…

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