Case Details

Citation(s)
2009 SLG 1440 2009 SLD 1440 (2000) 101 TAX 111 2009 PTD 1664 2010 PTCL 385
Lahore High Court
Tax Appeals Nos. 27 to 29 of 2005, heard on 26-05-2009
SYED ASGHAR HAIDER AND IMTIAZ RASHID SIDDIQUI, 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 PAKISTAN OIL FIELDS

VS

CUSTOMS CENTRAL EXCISE and SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ISLAMABAD

Law: Central Excise Act, (I of 1944)

Section: 35C,36C

[Central Excise Act (I of 1944)].......Sections 35C & 36C---Appeal to High Court---Order which disposes of an appeal by the Appellate Tribunal and served on the parties thereof under S.35C(3) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is the one which can be challenged under S.36C of the said Act before the High Court---Appeals directed against the order passed under S.35C(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 are incompetent in terms of S.36C of the said Act---Principles detailed. ORDER IMTIAZ RASHID SIDDIQUI, J.---This judgment will cover Tax Appeals Nos.27 of 2005, 28 of 2005 and 29 of 2005 as similar questions of facts and law are involved therein. The appeals have been filed under section 36C of the Central Excise Act, 1944, as the same have arisen from the judgment, dated 7-10-2004 passed by the learned Customs, Central Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Islamabad Bench-I. 2. The facts common in all these appeals are that Hydrogen Sulphide Gas was produced and consumed for production of Sulpher by the appellant at it's Meya Oil Field. However, it 'failed to pay central excise duty thereon during the relevant tax period; the same was taken up in a show-cause notice. An adjudication process resulted in Order-in-Original wherein a demand was raised, by the respondents, for an amount of leviable excise duty, penalty and additional excise duty front the appellant. As an appeal before the lower appellate authority did not succeed; the matter thus ultimately rested in appeal with the learned Customs Central Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. These appeals were then heard and decided vide judgment, dated 27-4-2002. The learned Tribunal partially allowed the appeals wherein demand of principal amount of excise duty was kept intact; however the imposition of penalty and additional excise duty was set aside. 3. Aggrieved of the aforesaid judgment the appellant instead of an appeal under section 36C of the Central Excise Act, 1944, however, filed a petition under section 35C(2) of the aforesaid Act. These petitions were taken up by the learned Tribunal and after hearing the appellant, these were dismissed vide order, dated 7-10-2004. Against the mentioned orders,…
🔒
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