Home Maxims & Terms Payment through electronic banking meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Payment through electronic banking

Payment through electronic banking legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)

2013 PTD 181 INLAND REVENUE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OF PAKISTAN Judicial Precedent
R.45(5)Sales Tax Rules, 2006, R.15(5)Payment through electronic bankingScopeDelay in clearing of paymentDeposit of tax after due dateEffectReturn for payment of Excise Duty was filed on 15th November, 2008 along with necessary documents and tax due

Account of the taxpayer was in a Bank which allowed concession and privilege to make payment electronically through direct debit

Tax paid by registered person on 15th November, 2008 through direct debit could not be transferred by the Bank in account of Revenue authorities

Payment of tax was cleared by the Bank on 17th November, 2008

Notice was issued to the taxpayer for delay in making payment of tax and additional tax and penalty was imposed on it

Validity

Department had not denied that payment of tax was made through electronic banking on 15th November, 2008 i.e. on due date

Payment was deposited in account of Revenue authorities on 17th November, 2008

Payment through direct debit was faster than any other mode, because the transfer of funds reflected immediately in the accounts of payer and recipient

Bank in question was working as agent of Revenue authorities and any payment received by the Bank under R.45(5) of the Federal Excise Rules, 2005 was deemed to have been received by Revenue authorities

When Bank for any reason deposited the collected amount late in the account of Revenue authorities it was a matter between agent/Bank and principle/Revenue authorities

Taxpayer could not be penalized under such circumstances

Payment made through electronic banking (direct debit) by taxpayer was within time

Direct debit, though, not expressly covered under R.45(5) of the Federal Exercise Rules, 2005, yet it sufficiently met the intent and object of rule makers

Principles of 'ejusdem generis' could be employed to construe that payment made through "direct debit" was under the said rule

Orders of authorities below were declared against the spirit of law and were annulled by the Appellate Tribunal.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Payment through electronic banking", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124939487

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Payment through electronic banking"

PTD 2013
Ex. No.32/LB of 2009, decided on 6th September, 2012

2013 P T D (Trib

Messrs SAMSOL INTERNATIONAL (PVT.) LTD., LAHORE Versus COLLECTOR OF SALES TAX AND FEDERAL EXCISE (APPEALS), LAHORE

Court: Inland Revenue Appellate Tribunal of Pakistan
CLD 2018
2018-April-13

2018 C L D 1152

HABIB BANK LIMITED through Litigation Officer — Petitioner Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through President Secretariat Islamabad and 2 others — Respondents

Court: Islamabad
CLD 2017
N/A

2017 C L D 552

Mst. TASLEEM FATIMA and others — Appellants Versus BANK OF PUNJAB and others — Respondents

Court: Lahore (Multan Bench)
CLD 2026
Writ Petition No.3464 of 2022, decided on 30th January, 2026.

2026 C L D 803

UNITED BANK LIMITED through authorized officer — Petitioner Versus PRESIDENT OF THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN, AIWAN-E-SADAR, ISLAMABAD and 2 others — Respondents

Court: Islamabad
CLC 2024
2022-March-28

2024 C L C 479

The COMMUNICATORS (PVT.) LTD. — Petitioner Versus PAKISTAN ELECTRONIC MEDIA REGULATORY AUTHORITY — Respondent

Court: Islamabad
CLD 2025
2025-May-2

2025 C L D 834

UNITED BANK LIMITED — Petitioner Versus PRESIDENT OF THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN and others — Respondents

Court: Lahore (Rawalpindi Bench)
YLR 2024
N/A

2024 Y L R 2635

Abdul Karim — Applicant Versus The State — Respondent

Court: Sindh
SCMR 2020
Civil Petitions Nos. 2459 to 2465 of 2017, decided on 1st October, 2019.

2020 S C M R 206

PAKISTAN ELECTRONIC MEDIA REGULATORY AUTHORITY (PEMRA) through Secretary — Petitioner Versus TRADE SERVE INTERNATIONAL (PVT.) LTD. LAHORE and others — Respondents

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
CLD 2006
7th March,. 2006,

2006 C L D 1491

METROPOLITAN STEEL CORPORATION LTD. — Plaintiff Versus MACSTEEL INTERNATIONAL U.K. LTD. — Defendant

Court: Karachi
PLD 2006
2006-March-7

P L D 2006 Karachi 664

METROPOLITAN STEEL CORPORATION LTD. — Plaintiff Versus MACSTEEL INTERNATIONAL U.K. LTD. — Defendant

Court: High Court