PTD 2008

2008 PLP 858 (PTD)

COLLECTOR SALES TAX AND FEDERAL EXCISE L.T.U. Versus Messrs QASIM INTERNATIONAL CONTAINER TERMINAL PAKISTAN LTD.

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Civil Petition No.588-K of 2006, decided on 3rd March, 2008.
Honorable Judges
Saiyed Saeed Ashhad and Syed Zawwar Hussain Jaffery, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2008 PLP 858 (PTD)
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Saiyed Saeed Ashhad and Syed Zawwar Hussain Jaffery, JJ
Parties COLLECTOR SALES TAX AND FEDERAL EXCISE L.T.U. Versus Messrs QASIM INTERNATIONAL CONTAINER TERMINAL PAKISTAN LTD.
Primary Law Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 858 (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 2008 PLP 858 (PTD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Saiyed Saeed Ashhad and Syed Zawwar Hussain Jaffery, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP 858 (PTD) (COLLECTOR SALES TAX AND FEDERAL EXCISE L.T.U. Versus Messrs QASIM INTERNATIONAL CONTAINER TERMINAL PAKISTAN LTD.). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990)

Representation

  • ----S.3(1-A)---Sindh Sales Tax Ordinance (VIII of 2000), S.3---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)---Levy and payment of further sales tax---Counsel for petitioner had contended that the High Court had erred in holding that the provisions of S.3(1-A) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, as it existed in 2001, would not be available to the government for charging/levying further tax and such could have been done only if S.3 of Sindh Sales Tax Ordinance, 2000 had specifically included provision of S.3(1-A) of Sales Tax Act, 1990---Counsel had further submitted that High Court had fallen in error in holding that the view/observation made by it was supported by five previous decisions; and submitted that all of them were distinguishable and not applicable to the facts and circumstances in the present case---Contentions advanced required thorough examination---Leave to appeal was granted for examination of said questions and any other allied or connected issue which could be found necessary to be considered at the time of final hearing.
  • Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Advocate Supreme Court and Akhlaq Ahmed Siddiqui, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal from the judgment dated 27-9-2006 passed by High Court of Sindh, Karachi in Special Sales Tax Reference Application No.81. of 2006). Nemo for represented.

Judgment & Decree

SAIYED SAEED ASHHAD, J.

We have heard Mr. Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, learned A.S.C. for the petitioner. His contention is that the High Court has erred in holding that the provisions of section 3(1A) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 (hereinafter referred to as the. "Act") as it existed in 2001 would not be available to the Government for charge/levying further tax and such could have been done only if section 3 of Sindh Sales Tax Ordinance, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the "Ordinance") had specifically included the provision of section 3(1A) of the Act. He further submitted that such. observation is absolutely contrary to the principles of Interpretation of Statutes according to which when a reference is made to a particular section then all parts thereof, that is to say subsections, clauses, provisos and explanations are included therein and it is not the requirement of law that each of them should be specifically mentioned. He also submitted that the High Court fell in error in holding that the view/observation made by it was supported by five previous decisions and submitted that all of them were distinguishable and not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. The contentions advanced require thorough examination. Accordingly, leave to appeal is granted inter alia for examination of the above questions and any other allied or connected issue which may be found necessary to be considered at the time of final hearing Office is directed to prepare the paper book on the present record with liberty to the parties to file further/additional documents on their behalf, if so desired. H.B.T./C-1/SC Leave granted.