Case Details

Citation(s)
2006 SLG 305 2006 SLD 305 2006 PTD 2184 2007 PTCL 454 (2006) 93 TAX 354
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No. 8472 of 1995, heard on 9-05-2006
ANWAR KAMAL FOR PETITIONER. IZHAR-UL-HAQ SHEIKH FOR RESPONDENT
Anwar Kamal for Petitioner. Izhar-ul-Haq Sheikh for
Respondent

Messrs W.M. SAYID (PVT.) LTD

VS

COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND SALES TAX, LAHORE and 2 others

Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990

Section: 2,2(12)(31A),3(1)

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 199

(a) Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990)---Ss. 2(12)(31-A) & 3(1)---S.R.O. 876(I)/94 and S.R.O. 877(I)/94, dated 8-9-1994---Collection of Sales Tax on Paper Board Rules, 1994, R.5---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Manufacturing of paperboard and its supply in wholesale---Demand of sales tax on such activity while treating assessee to be a wholesaler---Validity---Assessee had already paid sales tax on supplied paperboard at the rate specified in S.3(1) of Sales Tax Act, 1990---Assessee was manufacturer and supplier of paperboard and not a recipient liable to pay sales tax under S.R.O." 876(I)/94---S.R.O. 876(I)/94 & S.R.O. 877(I)/94 for not having retrospective effect would not apply to the present case---High Court accepted constitutional petition and set aside impugned demand being illegal. The Collector of Sales Tax and others v. Superior Textile Mills Ltd. and others PLD 2001 SC 600 ref. (b) Collection of Sales Tax on Paper Board Rules, 1994--- ----R. 5---Non-mentioning of required information in tax invoice by manufacturer of paperboard---Demand of penalty for such failure---Validity---Either in Sales Tax Act, 1990 or Collection of Sales Tax on Paper Board Rules, 1994, no provision existed to burden assessee for such failure---In absence of any express statutory provision allowing purchaser's liability to be shifted on to such manufacturer, impugned demand was unlawful. (c) Notification--- ----Retrospective effect could not be given to notification. JUDGMENT JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA, J.---This petition was decided by me vide judgment, dated 30-11-2001. The respondent department preferred an appeal which has been allowed and the matter remanded by means of a short order, dated 24-2-2006 which is reproduced as under:-- "These appeals are by leave of the Court against the judgment, dated 30-11-2001 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore. (2) Learned counsel for the respondents when asked to explain as to whether directions made by this Court vide judgment, dated 4th July, 2001 passed in C.Ps. Nos. 1568-L of 2001 to 1572-L of 2001 have been complied with or not? he stated that impugned judgment has been composed in accordance with…
🔒
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