2003 PLP 1746 (PTD)
Z. N. EXPORTS (PVT.) LTD. Versus COLLECTOR OF SALES TAX
| Citation | 2003 PLP 1746 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | Naseem Sikandar, J |
| Parties | Z. N. EXPORTS (PVT.) LTD. Versus COLLECTOR OF SALES TAX |
| Primary Law | Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 PLP 1746 (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2003 PLP 1746 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore High Court bench comprising: Naseem Sikandar, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 PLP 1746 (PTD) (Z. N. EXPORTS (PVT.) LTD. Versus COLLECTOR OF SALES TAX). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Tariq Bashir for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 46(4)
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199
Constitutional petition- -Appeal to Appellate Tribunal--Injunction order
Lapse of statutory period-- Recovery
Where the Appellate Tribunal grants interim relief it is incumbent upon the Tribunal to dispose of that appeal within the statutory period of six months in order to safeguard the interest of both the assessee/as well as the Revenue
High Court directed die-Appellate Tribunal to dispose of the pending appeal of the assessee at the earliest but not later than three months from the date of its order and till the disposal of appeal, meanwhile no coercive mode of recovery shall be enforced against the assessee.
Judgment & Decree
Tariq Bashir for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondent. The first appeal. filed by this petitioner before the Customs, Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal is stated to be pending wherein interim relief was allowed to him in the form of an injunctive order against the recovery of arrears of the demand raised in the impugned order. That injunction order has lost its efficacy due to lapse of statutory period of six months as contemplated in proviso to subsection (4) of section 46 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990. Thereafter according to the petitioner, the department has moved for the recovery. of the demand.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends and I will agree that before a recovery created by an impugned order by a Departmental Authority can be effected, an assessee, appellant must be heard by a forum outside the departmental hierarchy. The Tribunal as a forum of first appeal having not disposed of the appeal, the petitioner cannot be blamed on that account. In all fairness, equity and justice, an assessee should not be forced to pay a demand created by a Revenue Authority unless the order creating such demand has undergone the scrutiny of at least one independent forum.
3. This is however, subject to the exemption of a case where non-disposal of the first appeal by Extra Departmental Appellate Forum is caused by the assessee/petitioner himself. Where it is not so and where the Tribunal grants interim relief then it is incumbent upon it to dispose of that appeal within the A statutory period of. six months in order to safeguard the interest of both the assessee/appellant as .well as the Revenue.
4. Accordingly, I will direct the learned Tribunal to dispose of the pending appeal of the petitioner at the earliest but not later than three months from today. For the aforesaid reasons, it is further directed that till the disposal of the appeal by the Tribunal as aforesaid, no coercive mode of recovery shall be enforced against the petitioner.