| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2026 SLG 1433 2026 SLD 1433 |
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue, Lahore
M.A (Con) 23/LB/2021 & STA No.493/LB/2021 NTN No. 0679561-7
Presented By: (NASIR MAHMUD) Member (IMRAN MUNIR) Member
Appellant By: Mr. Zulfiqar Ahmed Nasir, FCA.
Respondent By: Mr. Imran Mehmood, DR Date of Hearing: 16.04.2026 Date of Order: 16.04.2026
M.A (Con) 23/LB/2021 & STA No.493/LB/2021 NTN No. 0679561-7
Presented By: (NASIR MAHMUD) Member (IMRAN MUNIR) Member
Appellant By: Mr. Zulfiqar Ahmed Nasir, FCA.
Respondent By: Mr. Imran Mehmood, DR Date of Hearing: 16.04.2026 Date of Order: 16.04.2026
M/s Mir Yousaf Leather Wear (Pvt), Limited Sialkot ….Appellant
VS
Commissioner Inland Revenue, Unit-II, RTO, Sialkot. ….Respondent
Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990
Section: 7, 10, 56
Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984
Section: 129
Law: General Clauses Act, 1897
Section: 27
Core Issue The appeal challenged the denial of zero-rating on electricity supplies (PCT 2716.000) for an exporter listed under S.R.O. 415(I)/2006, due to procedural non-compliance (failure to submit STGO application) and GEPCO consumer number discrepancies. The taxpayer argued revenue neutrality under Sections 7 & 10 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990; the Department insisted on strict procedure. Summary of Condonation of Delay (M.A (Con) 23/LB/2021) Application sought 59-day delay condonation, claiming late service of CIRA order dated 16.11.2020. No proof of service per Section 56 of Sales Tax Act, 1990; taxpayer learned of order via notice on 11.04.2025. Tribunal held strict compliance with service modes (primary/substituted) mandatory; mere dispatch insufficient. Presumption of service requires full legal proof under Qanun-e-Shahadat Article 129 & General Clauses Act Section 27. Delay condoned; appeal proceeded on merits. Summary of Main Appeal (STA No.493/LB/2021) Challenged CIRA upholding DCIR demand for sales tax on GEPCO electricity to exporter (leather/fabric garments, Serial No. 117, S.R.O. 415(I)/2006). CIRA denied zero-rating for lacking STGO No. 117 of 2015 application (Annexure-A) amid consumer number changes. Tribunal ruled: Substantive eligibility undisputed; procedural lapses (GEPCO changes beyond taxpayer control) cannot defeat zero-rating under Section 4 & notifications (S.R.O. 415(I)/2006, 931(I)/2005). Input tax refundable (Sections 7 & 10), making demand revenue-neutral. Judicial principle: Liberal construction for exporters; substance over technical form. Appeal allowed; CIRA & DCIR orders set aside; demand annulled. 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 delay. M.A (Con) 23/LB/2021 1. The instant application seeks condonation of a delay of 59 days in filing the appeal. The Applicant has contended that the impugned order dated 16.11.2020 was not served in time and that the appeal was filed promptly upon actual receipt of the said order. 2. The learned Authorized Representative…