Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990

Section: 45B, 11(2)

      Brief Facts Introduction This appeal has been filed by the registered person (appellant) against the appellate order dated 26.06.2023 issued by the Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals-II), Lahore. The CIR(A) dismissed the appellant’s appeal as time-barred under Section 45B of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, against the assessment order dated 29.06.2021 passed under Section 11(2). The appellant challenged the dismissal before the Tribunal, arguing that the order was never served and that the case should have been decided on merits. Background of Audit and Initial Assessment The appellant’s case was selected for sales tax audit under Section 72B for the tax periods July 2015 to June 2016. Despite several notices, the taxpayer failed to provide the required documents. As a result, the assessing officer passed assessment order No.8/2019 on 30.03.2019, raising a tax demand of Rs. 2,876,370 along with penalty and default surcharge. The appellant challenged that order, and the CIR(A) remanded the case on 04.07.2019 for re-adjudication with proper opportunity of hearing. Re-Adjudication and Fresh Assessment Order Following the remand, the assessing officer re-examined the case and issued a fresh order dated 29.06.2021, maintaining the earlier tax demand. The officer alleged inadmissible input tax, illegal withholding tax adjustment, non-payment on scrap supplies, and suppression of taxable sales. Appeal Before CIR(A) and Dismissal on Limitation The taxpayer filed an appeal before CIR(A-II), contending that (i) the order was never served; (ii) the assessment was passed ex parte in violation of natural justice; and (iii) delay was neither intentional nor deliberate. A formal application for condonation was also submitted. However, the CIR(A) held that the appeal was filed almost 15 months after the assessment order, far beyond the thirty-day period provided in Section 45B(1). Relying on case law (98 TAX 95; 2008 PTD 1203), the CIR(A) dismissed the appeal without examining the merits. Grounds of Appeal Before the Tribunal Before the Tribunal, the appellant argued that (i) the assessment order was never served as required under Section 56 of the…