1991 PLP 517 (PTD)
Messrs KAMRAN ENTERPRISES (Pvt.) Ltd. Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Finance,
| Citation | 1991 PLP 517 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi High Court |
| Bench Members | Syed Haider Ali Pirzada and Haziqul Khairi, JJ |
| Parties | Messrs KAMRAN ENTERPRISES (Pvt.) Ltd. Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Finance, |
| Primary Law | Sales Tax Act (III of 1951) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PLP 517 (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Sales Tax Act (III of 1951) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 PLP 517 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi High Court bench comprising: Syed Haider Ali Pirzada and Haziqul Khairi, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 PLP 517 (PTD) (Messrs KAMRAN ENTERPRISES (Pvt.) Ltd. Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Finance,). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Iqbal Raad and A. Sattar Memon for Petitioner.
- M. Hasan Adil Khatri, Standing Counsel for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 12th June, 1990.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 7
Notification allowing exemption of sales tax on goods of petitioner-- Subsequent withdrawal of such exemption
Whether notification of withdrawal of exemption retrospective in effect
Petitioner had acquired vested rights under the provisions of Notification granting exemption to petitioner's goods on the strength of which petitioner had made certain contractual commitments in the market
Since a vested right had already been created in favour of petitioner, the withdrawal Notification could not be given retrospective operation by executive act to discharge right of exemption earlier created in favour of petitioner. Crescent Pak Industries (Pvt.) Limited v. Central Board of Revenue 1990 PTD 29 ref.
Judgment & Decree
SYED HAIDER ALI PIRZADA, J.
By this common judgment we intend to dispose of the above five Constitutional Petitions as common point of law is involved in all of them. The point in issue in above five cases is that, whether the withdrawal of exemption under section 7 of the Sales Tax Act, 1957 with effect from 26-6-1988 would not be given effect to retrospectively so as to infringe the petitioners' vested rights which accrued to them when they made payments and opened letters of credit prior to 26-6-1988. It may be observed that the above point was also the subject-matter of the Constitutional petition reported in Crescent Pak Industries (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Central Board of Revenue 1990 P T D 29 wherein it was held that the exemption granted under the Sales-tax Act which regulates the levy of sales tax is a separate and distinct enactment. All these facts which occurred prior to the date of Notification issued on 26-6-1988 clearly established that the petitioners had acquired vested rights to the exemption under the prior notification applicable at that time. These acts including the contractual commitments made by them were done on the assurance contained in the prior notification extending the exemption from payment of Sales Tax. A right is created in their favour and subsequent withdrawal of exemption cannot be given retrospective operation by an executive act to discharge that right. This judgment was followed by us in C.P. No.D-929 of 1988 and other connected petitions decided by us on 11-6-1990. As we are in full agreement with the reasons given in those judgments we do not propose to re write the same here and adopt them for the purpose of supporting the view taken by the Divisional Bench in Crescent Pak Industries (Pvt.) Limited v. Central Board of Revenue etc. 1990 P T D
29. We see no reasons to take a different view in the above cases. We would, therefore, accept the above petitions. In the circumstances of the case the parties are directed to bear their own costs. H.B.T./K-240/K Petitions accepted.