Case Details

Citation(s)
2000 SLG 1791 2000 SLD 1791 2000 CLC 170
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No. 824 of 1992, heard on 11-08-1999. dates of hearing: 10th and 11th, August, 1999
ALI NAWAZ CHOWHAN, J
Salman K. Cheema for Petitioner. Chaudhri. Afrasiab Khan, Standing Counsel for the Federal Government

BIAFO INDUSTRIES

VS

FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN

Law:

Section:

(a) Taxation----- Taxation is that inherent power of Government to raise funds, with which it promotes general welfare and looks after the protection of citizens---Tax, in fact, is a charge to pay the cost of Government without regard to special benefits conferred. State v. Kromarek 52 NW 2d 713, 715, 78 ND 769 and In re: Shurtz's Will, 46 NW 2d 559, 562, 242 Iowa 448 rel. (b) Words and phrases--- ......Fee" and "tax"---Distinction---Fee is meant to defray the cost of particular services rendered to particular individuals---Tax is levied as a part of common burden or general revenue while a fee is a payment for special benefit or privilege---Tax is imposed for public purposes and is not supported by any consideration of service rendered in return, whereas a fee is levied in view of services rendered and there is an element of quid pro quo between the payer of the fee and the authority which imposes the same---In the matter of fee the Government has always to offer an explanation vis-a-vis the reasonableness and as long there is reasonableness the requirements of quid pro quo get satisfied. Abdul Majid and another v. Province of East Pakistan and others PLD 1960 Dacca 502; Australian's case 60 CLC 263; Mahboob Yar Khan PLD 1975 Lah. 748; Sh. Muhammad Ismail's case PLD 1966 SC 388 and AIR 1963 SC 966 rel. (c) Imports and Exports (Control) Act (XXXIX of 1950)--- ----S. 3---Constitution of Pakistan (19731, Art.199---Constitutional petition--­Levy of import licence fee---Industrial concern of the petitioner was situated in an area which was declared to be a rural area and 2% ad valorem licence fee was charged---At the time when petitioner applied for an import licence for machinery the area of the petitioner had been excluded from such definition of rural area and 6 % ad valorem licence fee was demanded from the petitioner--­Such 6 % fee was paid by petitioner under protest---After issue of the licence and prior to import of machinery once again the area of the petitioner was declared as rural area and the rate of 2 % ad valorem licence fee, instead of 6 % , was trade applicable---Petitioner demanded for the refund of excess fee which was refused by the…
🔒
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