Delay in clearing of payment

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.