2005 PLP 132 (SCMR)
COLLECTOR OF SALES TAX and others — Petitioners Versus Messrs SHAHBAZ & CO. and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2005 PLP 132 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and Falak Sher, JJ |
| Parties | COLLECTOR OF SALES TAX and others — Petitioners Versus Messrs SHAHBAZ & CO. and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 132 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2005 PLP 132 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and Falak Sher, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 132 (SCMR) (COLLECTOR OF SALES TAX and others — Petitioners Versus Messrs SHAHBAZ & CO. and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Izhar-ul-Haque, Advocate Supreme Court with Tanvir Ahmed, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 26th July, 2004.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment, dated 27-10-2003 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in S.T.As. NOS.281 to 307 of 2002).
S. 58
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)
Leave to appeal was granted by Supreme Court to consider; whether the respondent company had passed on sales tax to the persons who were the recipient of the goods; whether payment of sales tax under S.58 of Sales Tax Act, 1990, was to be made in the same manner as was required to be paid in case of supply to a registered person as such no refund could be claimed; and whether the respondent-company in fact passed on the sales tax to the recipient and did not pay the same from its own pocket. Civil Petition No.1068-L of 2002; Noon Sugar Mills Ltd. v. Market Committee PLD 1989 SC 449; Muhammad Hussain and others v. Muhammad and others 2000 SCMR 367 and Ali Muhammad through L.Rs. v. Chief Settlement Commissioner 2001 SCMR 1822 ref.
Judgment & Decree
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.
The above listed petitions have been filed against the judgment, dated 27-10-2003 passed by Lahore High Court, Lahore.
2. The petitions are barred by time. An application has been moved seeking condonation of the delay. Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that in a connected case i.e. Civil Petition No. 1068-1 of 2002, wherein identical question was involved leave to appeal has already been granted by this Court on 12th April, 2002 therefore, he argued that following the dictum laid down in the case Noon Sugar Mills Ltd. v. Market Committee PLD 1989 SC 449, delay may be condoned and treating the petition within time, leave to appeal may be granted in this case as well. It maybe noted that the question of condoning of delay on the ground so urged by the learned counsel is debatable in view of the latest judgment of this Court in the case of Muhammad Hussain and others v. Muhammad and others 2000 SCMR 367 and Ali Muhammad through L.Rs. v. Chief Settlement Commissioner 2001 SCMR 1822, however leaving the question of limitation for consideration at a later stage, in view of the earlier judgment of this Court in Civil Petition No. 1068-L of 2002 wherein leave to appeal has been granted subject to limitation, leave to appeal in this case is also granted to examine the following questions. "(a) that the respondent had passed on the same to the said persons who were the recipients of the goods; (b) that the payment of the Sales Tax under the said section was to be made in the same manner as was required to be paid in case of supply to a registered person as such no refund could be claimed; (c) and that the respondent in fact passed on the said tax to the recipient and did not pay the same from its own packet. " The appeals arising out of instant petitions are directed to be fixed alongwith the appeal arising out of the Civil Petition No. 1068-L of 2002. Notice of the application for condonation of delay be also issued to the respondents and on filing their reply the question of limitation shall be taken up at the time of final hearing of the appeals. M.H./C-8/S Leave granted.