| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2012 SLG 201 2012 SLD 201 (2012) 106 TAX 65 2012 PTD 1016 |
Islamabad High Court
S.T.R. No.1 of 2007, decision dated: 14-03-2012, hearing DATE : 23rd February, 2012
MUHAMMAD ANWAR KHAN KASI AND SHAUKAT AZIZ SIDDIQUI, JJ
Hafiz Muhammad Idrees for Petitioner. Syed Touqeer Bukhari and Raja Karim Akhtar, Inland Revenue Officer Legal-II for
Respondents
S.T.R. No.1 of 2007, decision dated: 14-03-2012, hearing DATE : 23rd February, 2012
MUHAMMAD ANWAR KHAN KASI AND SHAUKAT AZIZ SIDDIQUI, JJ
Hafiz Muhammad Idrees for Petitioner. Syed Touqeer Bukhari and Raja Karim Akhtar, Inland Revenue Officer Legal-II for
Respondents
Messrs PAKISTAN ORDINANCE FACTORIES (POF) WAH, CANTT
VS
COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, SALES TAX AND CENTRAL EXCISE ADJUDICATION), ISLAMABAD and others
Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990
Section: 11,36(1)
(a) Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990)----Ss. 11 & 36(1)---Order-in-original passed on. 25-2-2004 after issuance of show cause on 4-12-2002---Validity---Provision bringing penal consequences must be invoked or exercised within time prescribed by statute itself---Law required passing of such order within 135 days including extended/grace period---Such order had been passed after 448 days of show-cause notice with inordinate delay of 313 days---Extension of time obtained on 20-11-2003 was patently time barred---Authority had not shown any reasonable justification for such delay---Government departments could not be put at higher pedestal in matter of limitation, rather they would be supposed to act within statutory period---Order was barred by limitation in circumstances. 2007 PTD (Trib.) 840; Adil Poplypropylene Products Ltd. and others v. The Federation of Pakistan through Secretary Finance and others 2000 SCMR 1708; 2008 PTD 2025; 2009 PTD 2004; 2010 PTD 1520; 2011 SCMR 1279 and PLD 1974 SC 134 ref. PLD 2006 SC 209 = 2006 PTD 769 rel. (b) Interpretation of statutes----Fiscal statute---Provision bringing penal consequences, invocation of---Scope---Such provision must be invoked or exercised within time prescribed by statute itself. (c) Limitation-- ----Treatment of Government departments etc., in matter of limitation--Principles stated. Government departments cannot be put at higher pedestal when it comes to limitation. The executive functionaries, quasi and non-quasi judicial forums/tribunals are supposed to follow the mandate of law and perform their duties, exercise their jurisdiction and execute their authority within the period provided by law. Inefficiency, slackness, incompetence and inaction on the part of executive functionaries or persons on the helm of affairs by itself is no ground to ignore the command of law of performing any act within the stipulated period. The exception of unreasonable delay can be evaded, if statute does not prescribe the time period/limit in which act has to be performed. JUDGMENT SHAUKAT AZIZ SIDDIQUI, J.---Through instant Sales Tax Reference, the petitioner/applicant Messrs Pakistan Ordnance Factories, Wah Cantt has sought…
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