| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2006 SLG 331 2006 SLD 331 2006 PTD 558 (2005) 92 TAX 77 |
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue
S.T.A. No. 714/PB of 2002, decision dated: 7-01-2005, hearing DATE : 2-10-2004
RAJA MUHAMMAD KHAN, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) MUHAMMAD WALI KHAN, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)
Petitioner(s) by: Aamer Amin, F.C.A.
Respondent(s) by: Qurban Ali Khan, D.R., Ishtiaq Ahmad, Law Officer, Syed Phool Badshah, Najeeb Qadir, Cost Accountants, Shuaib Sultan and Inamul Haq, Senior Auditors
S.T.A. No. 714/PB of 2002, decision dated: 7-01-2005, hearing DATE : 2-10-2004
RAJA MUHAMMAD KHAN, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) MUHAMMAD WALI KHAN, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)
Petitioner(s) by: Aamer Amin, F.C.A.
Respondent(s) by: Qurban Ali Khan, D.R., Ishtiaq Ahmad, Law Officer, Syed Phool Badshah, Najeeb Qadir, Cost Accountants, Shuaib Sultan and Inamul Haq, Senior Auditors
Deprecated: preg_match(): Passing null to parameter #2 ($subject) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 411
Deprecated: htmlspecialchars(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 435
Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990
Section: 2(41),3,11,22,30,32,32A,33,34,Sixth Schedule
Law: Central Excise Rules, 1944
Section: Preamble
(a) Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990)---Ss. 32-A & 30---Special Audit by Chartered Accounts or Cost Accountants---Territorial jurisdiction to conduct the audit---Cost Accountant who was posted at Collectorate of Sales Tax, Gujranwala and had supervised the audit team could not produce any notification under S.30 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 with regard to extension of territorial jurisdiction to him to carry out audit at Peshawar---Letter issued by the Central Board of Revenue authorizing him to conduct the audit, was produced, besides him, the audit team consisted of local officers of sales tax under whose territorial jurisdiction the unit fell---Even if the Cost Accountant was not properly notified for conducting audit at Peshawar, it did not render the entire exercise of audit without jurisdiction---Since there were other local officers who were party to the audit report, same could not be ignored in toto and that no notification under S.32-A of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 was required since it was a routine audit conducted by the local officers. (b) Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990)--- ----Ss. 32-A, 22, 11 & 3---Central Excise Act (I of 1944), Preamble---Central Excise Rules, 1944, Preamble---Special Audit by Chartered Accountants or Cost Accountants---Mode of audit---Audit on the basis of consumption of raw material---Validity---Under S.22 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, a registered person had to maintain certain record which was to be subjected to audit---Auditors, instead of focusing their attention on the prescribed record, had totally relied on presumptive and hypothetical consumption of single raw material for making assessment under S.11 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990---Although, S.11 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 provided for tax due on supplies made but no such word was explicitly included in the said section to presume the quantity of supply---Unlike the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Central Excise Rules, 1944, the Sales Tax Act, 1990 did not give power or envisage any procedure for determining the production on the basis of presumptive or hypothetical consumption of raw materials---Novel method adopted for determination of production on the basis of presumption…
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