Case Details

Citation(s)
2012 SLG 173 2012 SLD 173 2012 PTD 337
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue
S.T.A. No.678/LB of 2011, decision dated: 12-10-2011
M.A., JAVED SHAHIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND TABANA SAJJAD NASEER, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Abuzar Hussain and Khubaib Ahmad for Appellant. Nayyar Mehmood, D.R. for
Respondent

Messrs R.J. COTTON WASTE FACTORY, FAISALABAD

VS

COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE (Zone-III), (R.T.O.), FAISALABAD

Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990

Section: 21,21(2),10(4),11(2),46

Law: General Clauses Act, 1897

Section: 24A

(a) Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990)---Ss. 21(2), 10(4), 11(2) & 46---Sales Tax Rules, 2006, Rr.12 & 37---General Clauses Act (X of 1897), S.24-A---Sales Tax General Order No.3 of 2004 dated 12-6-2004---De-registration, blacklisting and suspension of registration---Claim of refund---Taxpayer was black-listed on the charges of claiming excessive and abnormal refund intending to make a loss to national exchequer---On referring the matter back for de novo proceedings by the Appellate Tribunal, adjudicating authority restored the taxpayer's registration partially w.e..f. 2-9-2010 instead of restoration from the date of registration---First Appellate Authority observed that refund claim was admissible upon validation of input tax invoices from STARR System and under the provision of S.73 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 however, the refund could not be made at this stage in the light of fresh order and allowed the refund subject to restoration of their registration status from the date of registration---Taxpayer contended that adjudicating authority had restored the registration status w.e.f 2-9-2010 instead of from the date of their registration i.e. 14-12-2009 but on the other hand, he had himself condoned delay in making of payments beyond time-limit as specified under S.73 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 against certain transactions pertaining to the period prior to 2-9-2010 which was an ample evidence of genuineness and veracity of such transactions vis-a-vis status of the taxpayer; and act of non-restoration of their status for the same period amounted to discrimination under the law and adjudication under S.11(2) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 determining fate of claims of refund should have been made first to establish charges of claiming of excessive abnormal refunds which was done at later stage after black-listing order, had no legal sanctity and of no legal effect and the order of adjudicating officer was illegal, non-speaking and sketchy as he had not applied his judicial mind and was liable to be set aside---Validity---Taxpayer was black-listed solely on the ground that excessive and abnormal refunds were claimed as given in the show cause notice: ", on…
🔒
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