Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990

Section: 7, 10,48, 56, 48(1)(b)

Law: Sales Tax Rules, 2006

Section: 71(2)(d)

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 129

Law: General Clauses Act, 1897

Section: 27

Here’s a clear, concise summary of the tribunal order: 1. Delay Condonation (M.A Con 23/LB/2021) The appeal was filed 59 days late. The Appellant argued the delay occurred because the order (dated 16.11.2020) was not properly served. The Tribunal found: No evidence that the order was served as required under Section 56 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990. The Appellant only became aware of the order upon receiving a recovery notice in April 2025. Decision: Delay was justified → Condoned. Appeal allowed to proceed. 2. Main Appeal (STA No. 493/LB/2021) Background The case involved sales tax on electricity supplied by GEPCO to an exporter. Lower authorities denied zero-rating benefit because: The Appellant did not submit the required application (STGO procedure). There were discrepancies in electricity consumer numbers. 3. Appellant’s Arguments The Appellant is an export-oriented manufacturer (eligible under S.R.O. 415(I)/2006). Issue arose due to GEPCO changing consumer numbers, not taxpayer fault. Even if tax is charged, it is refundable, making the demand revenue-neutral. 4. Department’s موقف Procedural compliance (application for zero-rating) was mandatory. Failure to comply → benefit rightly denied. 5. Tribunal Findings The Appellant is undisputedly eligible for zero-rating. Consumer number changes were administrative and beyond the Appellant’s control. Substantive rights cannot be denied due to procedural lapses. Since input tax is refundable, the demand is revenue-neutral and unnecessary. 6. Final Decision Appeal allowed. Orders of both: Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals) Deputy Commissioner Inland Revenue → Set aside. Tax demand → Cancelled. Key Takeaways Proper service of order is essential for limitation. Procedural lapses ≠ denial of substantive tax benefits. Courts favor substance over technicalities, especially for exporters. Revenue-neutral demands are generally discouraged. APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INLAND REVENUE, LAHORE BENCH, LAHORE. O r d e r Nasir Mahmud (Member):  An appeal, along with an application seeking condonation of delay, has been filed. We shall first decide the application for condonation of…