Case Details

Citation(s)
2005 SLG 665 2005 SLD 665 2005 PTD 2596 (2005) 91 TAX 29
Lahore High Court
S.T.As. Nos.518 of 2002 and 23-S of 2000, decision dated: 6-04-2005
MIAN HAMID FAROOQ AND SYED HAMID ALI SHAH, JJ

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

Messrs MALIK PESTICIDE (PVT.) LTD., LAHORE

VS

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, DRY PORT, LAHORE, and another

Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990

Section: SixthSched.,ItemsNos.12and17

Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990)--- ----Sixth Sched., Items Nos. 12 and 17---"Pesticide" and "Weedicide"---Distinction---Exemption from sales tax---Classification of such products under separate PCT Headings in Pakistan Customs Tariff---Different usages/end use of both such products---"Weedicides" would not fall within definition of "insecticide"---Pesticides are used against live insects, whereas weedicide is used to weed-out herbicides anti-spouting products or for unnecessary plant growth---Exemption to weedicide from sales tax not having retrospective effect. ORDER SYED HAMID ALI SHAH, J.---By this single order we propose to decide S.T. Appeal No.23-S of 2000 titled "Malik Pesticides v. Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal etc." and S.T. Appeal No.518 of 2002 titled "Messrs Malik Pesticides v. The Customs Central Excise & Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal etc." as common questions of law and fact are involved in both these appeals. 2. Appellant claims exemption on "WEEDICIDES", a product imported by it on the following grounds:--- (i) Weedicide is a kind of "Pestcide". This word appears in 6th Schedcule for the purpose of exemption. (S. No. 12). (ii) Weedicide was exempted from Sales Tax for the last 15 years. (iii) According to notification issued by the Ministry of Agriculture, Weedicide is shown as Pesticide. (iv) Department of Plant Protections has also issued a certificate for the import of Weedicide as Pesticide. 3. The appellant thus claims the weedicide is covered under pesticide, the respondent No.3, served a demand notice for recovery of Rs. 1,46,773 being short paid amount on account of erroneous interpretation of the word "pesticide". The appellant replied to the notice and respondent No.3 passed Order-in-Original No.49 of 1999 on 13-5-1999, holding the appellant guilty of depriving the Government from its legitimate revenue to the tune tof Rs. 1,46,773 and ordered the appellant to deposit the said amount forthwith. The appellant challenged the said order in Appeal No. 1198 before respondent No.2, who vide order dated 14-9-1999 upheld the decision of respondent No.3. The appellant then agitated the matter before respondent No. 1, where the appeal filed 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