Case Details

Citation(s)
1983 SLG 101 1983 SLD 101 1983 PTD 271 (1983) 48 TAX 74 1984 PTCL 20
Sindh High Court
S. T. C. Application No. 251 of 1972, decision dated: 18-04-1983, hearing DATE : 4-04-1983
SAEEDUZ ZAMAN SIDDIQUI AND FAKHRUDDIN H. SHAIKH, JJ
Nasrullah Awan for Applicant. Ali Athar for
Respondent

THE COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX, KARACHI (EAST), KARACHI

VS

MESSRS CHAUDHRY FARZAND ALI

Law: Sales Tax Act, (III of 1951)

Section: 5(3),17(i),28,28(1),28(2)

(a) Sales Tax Act (III of 1951)--Ss. 28 & 5(3) Interpretation of statutes Practice and procedure--Departmental instructions followed for a considerably long period--Held, such practice cannot be departed Form SST 15 prescribed by C. B. R. not in derogation of any provision of Act or Rules framed thereunder Form consistently followed by Sales Tax Officers while issuing notice under S. 28 and binding on Sales Tax Officers by virtue of S. 5(3) Held, Sales Tax Officer bound to adopt period of 35 days mentioned in Form S. S. T. 15. (b) Sales Tax Act (III of 1951)----S. 28 Contention that deletion of 35 days period mentioned in Form S. S. T. 1: not rendered assessment void as Form permitted by C. B. R. was only directory in nature and any departure from said. Form would not render assessment void Held, absence of any specific prejudice caused to assessee may not have effect of rendering assessment void Time allowed to assessee to file return curtailed to prejudice and disadvantage of assessee not merely question of departure from Form Assessee allowed 3 days period to file return of sales tax for a period of 10 years Assessee could file quarterly return within 30 days of end of quarter Held, assessee should have been allowed period which assessee provided for filing quarterly return Sales Tax Officer could not fix period less than that mentioned in Form or alternatively not less than period prescribed under S. 10 for filing of quarterly return. JUDGMENT SAEEDUZZAMAN SIDDIQUI, J. These direct references under section 17(i) of the Sales Tax Act, 1951 (we will hereafter refer it as the Act only) have been filed by the department referring the following two questions for our decision : "(ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the notice dated 21 6 1965 which was issued under subsection (2) of section 28, was void ab initio because it did not allow 35 days time for the filing of the returns? (iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that there is a minimum mandatory period of 35 days for filing returns required under sub-section…
🔒
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