Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990

Section: 3B,6,66

Law: Customs Act, 1969

Section: 30,33,18B,19

Law: Sale of Goods Act, (III of 1930)

Section: 64-A

Law: Code of Civil Procedure of 1882

Section: 11,O.II,R.2

(a) Judgment--- ----Order in a ---Order made by a Court of unlimited jurisdiction in the course of continuous litigation are either regular or irregular---No distinction can be drawn between orders that are "void" in the sense that they can be ignored with impunity by those persons to whom they are addressed, and orders which are "voidable" in the sense that they may be enforced until set aside, since any order must be obeyed unless and until it is set aside and there are no orders which are void ipso facto without the need for proceedings to set them aside---If a contravention of an order is to be visited with penalties of a criminal nature that order must be in clear and unmistakable language---Obligation must not rest upon any implication to be derived from any word used in respect of other matters by the Court; it must be couched in express terms and must be brought directly to the notice of the party. Issacs v. Roberton (1984 (3) All. ER 140 and Hayat Ahmed Khan v. Bashir Sadiq PLD 1952 Lah. 48 quoted. (b) Contempt of Court--- ----Refund of customs duty, sales tax and service charges to the petitioner---Allegation of violation of of the Supreme Court---Petitioner insisted for initiating contempt proceedings against the officers of Central Board of Revenue as according to it they were responsible for violating the of the Supreme Court---Supreme Court declined to be persuaded to subscribe to its contention; firstly for the reason that the Central Board of Revenue or its officers, in the letters addressed to the petitioner from time to time, had not denied the refund of customs duty, sales tax and service charges to, petitioner; secondly in the of Supreme Court, no directions were made to the Government as well as Central Board of Revenue for the refund immediately and in the of the High Court which was restored by the of the Supreme Court, it was held therein that petitioner was entitled to exemption of customs duty, Sales Tax and Service Charges in view of the authorization letter by the Government, Petitioner had not furnished any bank guarantee before the High Court for the purpose of release of goods nor the High Court as well as the Supreme Court…

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