1983SCMR 789 (PLP)
HIRJINA & CO., (PAK.) LTD. AND OTHERS — Petitioners Versus ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN AND ANOTHER-Respondents
| Citation | 1983SCMR 789 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | HIRJINA & CO., (PAK.) LTD. AND OTHERS — Petitioners Versus ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN AND ANOTHER-Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973), ORDER |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1983SCMR 789 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973), ORDER as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1983SCMR 789 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1983SCMR 789 (PLP) (HIRJINA & CO., (PAK.) LTD. AND OTHERS — Petitioners Versus ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN AND ANOTHER-Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Khalid Anwar, Advocate Supreme Court with S. M. Abbas, Advocate-on -Record for Petitioner (in C. P. K-274 to 277 of 1982).
- Faizan-ul-Haq, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner (in C. P. Nos. K-278, K-279 and K-284/82).
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing : 10th November, 1982.
- Khalid Anwar, Advocate Supreme Court with S. M. Abbas, Advocate‑on -Record for Petitioner (in C. P. K‑274 to 277 of 1982).
- Faizan‑ul‑Haq, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner (in C. P. Nos. K‑278, K‑279 and K‑284/82).
Headnotes / Summary
Art. 185(3) read with Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Third Sched., Entry 43 (b) and Central Excises arid Salt Act (1 of 1944), S. 3(i) Excise duty on alcoholic liquor-Leave to appeal--Granted to consider whether duty levied under S. 3(1) of Act on excisable services was in relation to alcoholic liquor which could not be levied for constitu tional bar and whether levy of duty on services by hotel, restaurant or bar was constitutionally not permissible.
Judgment & Decree
Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing : 10th November, 1982. ABDUL QADIR SHAIKH, J.‑Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the excise duty levied under section 3(1) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 in relation to excisable services provided or rendered in rela tion to alcoholic liquor is in its pith and substance, a duty on "alcoholic liquor" and cannot, therefore, be levied due to the bar contained under Entry 43 (b) of the Third Schedule of the 1962 Constitution. ' Learned counsel further submitted that even otherwise levy of duty on services by hotel, restaurant and bar, as an excise duty, is constitutionally not permissible. These and other questions raised by the learned counsel are of general public importance and deserve an authoritative decision of this Court. Leave is granted and the petitions are allowed. Security Rs. 2,500 in each case. Appeals will be heard on the present record. It is, however, open to the parties to file additional documents, if any. Notice of Miscellaneous Petitions for grant of interim relief to issue to the Deputy Attorney‑General for a date in office. Leave granted.