Case Details

Citation(s)
2002 SLG 855 2002 SLD 855 2002 PTCL 449 2003 PTD 1002
Peshawar High Court
Writ Petitions Nos. 1144 and 1526 of 1997, decision dated: 25-05-2002
ABDUR RAUF KHAN LUGHMANI AND SHAHZAD AKHTER KHAN, JJ
Abdul Latif Yousaf Zai for Appellant

Messrs LUCKY CEMENT LIMITED

VS

C.B.R and others

Law: Central Excise Act, (I of 1944)

Section: 2

(Central Excises Act (I of 1944)]......Ss 4(2) & 2(1)(7)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199--­Constitutional petition---Levy of excise duty on basis of retail price--­Retail price inclusive cat taxes and charges---Retail price whether includes excise duty---Validity---Ingredients of retail price as given in S.4(2) of the Central Excises Act, 1944 were that it would be fixed by the manufacturer; that it would be the price at which the goods brought were to be sold; that if more than one such price was fixed for the same brand the highest of such price and that it would include all charges and taxes but not the sales tax---Charges would mean and include the move spent by the manufacturer himself or any intermediary of the manufacture---Packing, repacking transport, advertising etc. were included---"Tax" had been used and was to be taken as a tax whether of Central or Provincial Government---Terms used and invogue were tax, charge, fee and duty for revenue realization---Legislature was fully aware of these terms and in S.4(2) for inclusion in the retail price two terms namely "charges" and "taxes" had been used---Word `duty' had not been used and such omission was significant so as to indicate intention of the law makers---If the intention was to include excise duty in the retail price it could have been easily done by adding "duty" or `excise duty'---If the retail price included `duty' that would amount to double taxation which indeed was not the intention of the law---Object was to impose excise duty once and not twice---Fiscal statutes were to be interpreted liberally in favour of the subject---Respondents agreed in principle that no excise duty could be levied or collected on excise duty-­Object of the Central Excises Act, 1944 or for that matter S.4(2) thereof was not double taxation---Excise duty was not to be treated as part of retail price for the purpose of duty of excise payable under the Central Excises Act, 1944---System of realization of duties of excise on the `retail price' conclusive of excise duty was illegal and without lawful Authority---High Court, in circumstances, allowed the Constitutional petition. (b) Central Excises Acct (I…
🔒
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