Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 9

Law: Civil Courts Ordinance, 1962

Section: 7

Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990

Section: 46

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908 ) ---

----S. 9---Civil Courts Ordinance (II of 1962), S. 7---Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990), S. 46---Suit before Single Bench of the High Court against the tax authorities, filing of---Alternate remedy , availability of ---Plaintiff (taxpayer) filed present suit against the suspension of its Sales Tax Registration--Contention of the plaintiff was that despite the issuance of pre-suspension notice no opportunity was provided---Validity---Said contention appeared to be misconceived as the requirement of law had been complied with, whereas, the plaintiff / petitioner ought to have availed further remedy in accordance with law including but not limited to S.46 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990---High Court has to exercise its original side jurisdiction sparingly and with caution, it may still take cognizance of any suit arising out of an action/order of the tax authorities/Customs Officers, however, such jurisdiction must be sparingly exercised by the Single Bench---High Court is not required to mandatorily exercise such jurisdiction in tax matters on the Original Side of the High Court in terms of S.9 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 , read with S.7 of the Civil Courts Ordinance, 1962---Jurisdiction vested in the High Court specially in tax / revenue matters is not to be exercised in every run-of-the-mill case---Thus, the plaintiff ought to have availed the alternate remedy---Suit, being not maintainable and misconceived, was dismissed.

Saleem Ahmed v. Federation of Pakistan 2021 PTD 1813 and Searle IV Solution (Pvt.) Ltd and others v. Federation of Pakistan and others 2018 SCMR 1444 ref.