2005 PLP 2376 (PTD)
Messrs PETROSIN RAVI INDUSTRIES LTD., LAHORE Versus SUPERINTENDENT SALES TAX, LAHORE and 3 others
| Citation | 2005 PLP 2376 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | Mian Hamid Farooq and Syed Hamid Ali Shah, JJ |
| Parties | Messrs PETROSIN RAVI INDUSTRIES LTD., LAHORE Versus SUPERINTENDENT SALES TAX, LAHORE and 3 others |
| Primary Law | Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 2376 (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 2005 PLP 2376 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore High Court bench comprising: Mian Hamid Farooq and Syed Hamid Ali Shah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 2376 (PTD) (Messrs PETROSIN RAVI INDUSTRIES LTD., LAHORE Versus SUPERINTENDENT SALES TAX, LAHORE and 3 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Syed Sajjad Hussain Naqvi for Appellant.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 47
Appeal to the High Court
Only ground taken by the appellant was that it had been agitating the matter before the Federal Government through Privatization Commission
No specific date had been mentioned in the application showing as to when the Federal Court was approached and when the request of the appellant was declined
No proof was available with regard to the fact that, the Government of Pakistan had ever been approached by appellant or its request was ever entertained
Delay of each day had to be explained, which the appellant had failed to do
Application for condonation of delay was dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
C.M. No.1 of 2005. The applicant, through the instant application, has sought the condonation of delay, in fling the instant appeal, which has been filed after the lapse of about two years.
2. The only ground taken for the condonation for the delay is that the applicant has been agitating the matter before Ministry of Industries and Production through Privatization Commission. No specific date has been mentioned in the application about the fact that' when the Government of Pakistan was approached and when the request of the A petitioner was declined. There is no proof with regard to the fact that the Government of Pakistan has ever been approached or the request was ever entertained. The delay of each day has to be explained. The applicant has failed to explain unreasonable delay of about two years in filing the appeal. The application is without merit and is dismissed. Main Appeal. The appeal in hand has not been filed within the period of limitation. The application for the condonation of delay has been dismissed. The appeal being barred by limitation is also dismissed. M.B.A./P-77/L Appeal dismissed.