Home Maxims & Terms Franchise meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Franchise

Franchise legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

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

2023 PTD 102 ISLAMABAD Judicial Precedent
S.2(12a)FranchiseNecessary ingredients

To infer a franchise under S. 2(12a) of Federal Excise Act, 2005 necessary ingredients are namely, (i) authority by franchiser, (ii) resultant right acquired by franchisee, (iii) franchised service or product, (iv) fee therefor and (v) identification of product or service with franchiser.

2023 PTD 102 ISLAMABAD Judicial Precedent
Ss.2(12a) & 34-AReferenceFranchiseDetermination

Assessee was aggrieved of order passed by Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue maintaining order of authorities and assessee was required to pay excise duty on services

Validity

Fee charged for technical services was not per se ground to infer a franchise, when neither S.2(12a) of Federal Excise Act, 2005, so prescribed nor was such a business reality

Name 'technical fee' or 'fee for technical assistance' were mere convenient labels and no more

When two companies charged technical fee for telecommunication network support activities to mobile companies, software companies charge technical fee for customized software deployed in networks, a maintenance and operations service provider charged technical fee to solar power projects, none of such were franchise relationships

Franchise as defined in S.2(12a) of Federal Excise Act, 2005 based on label given in a company's accounts to fee received for services was tantamount to rewriting S.2(12a) of Federal Excise Act, 2005, in its entirety

Television Channel in question was not a franchised service and was not caught by S.2(12a) of Federal Excise Act, 2005

Reference was allowed accordingly.

2016 PTD 1328 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent
Franchise agreementConnotation'Franchisor' and 'franchisee'Rights and obligations

Franchise agreement allowed the franchisee the right to use the mark or patent of a franchisor for a royalty or fee and the franchisee must ensure that the goods or services maintained the uniformity and standard of the franchisor's goods or services

Franchisor provided technical assistance and know-how to protect its mark or patent so as to ensure uniformity in quality and therefore, a franchisor shared its business model with all relevant details so that the franchisee could use the patent, logo or mark of the franchisor and maintain the standard, style, quality and look of the product or services provided, as if it was given by the franchisor itself

Franchisor must grant the franchisee the right to use its patent or mark or logo, that was its intellectual property, to the extent necessary to operate the franchisee business

Franchisor also provided the assistance and know-how in support of the business and helped solve problems along the way.

1958 PLD 298 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

Franchise Franchise-Women's-History.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Franchise", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/2176

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Franchise"

PTD 2026
Federal Excise Reference Applications Nos.2, 3, 4 and 5 of 2016, decided on 30th May, 2024.

2026 P T D 173

HUB POWER COMPANY LIMITED Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE (AUDIT-VI)

Court: Islamabad High Court
PTD 2023
F.E.R.A. No.04 of 2021, decided on 25th May, 2022.

2023 P T D 102

PAKISTAN TELEVISION CORPORATION through Company Secretary Versus COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE (AUDIT-V), LARGE TAXPAYERS OFFICE and 4 others

Court: Islamabad High Court
PLD 2003
N/A

P L D 2003 Supreme Court 567

ARSHAD MAHMOOD and others — Petitioners Versus GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB through Secretary Transport, Civil Secretariat, Lahore and others — Respondents

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
PTD 2016
Writ Petition No.16047 of 2010, decided on 20th January, 2016.

2016 P T D 1736

PUNJAB BEVERAGES CO. (PVT.) LTD. through General Manager Finance Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Ministry of Finance and others

Court: Lahore High Court
PTD 2016
W.P. No.9491 of 2006, decided on 22nd January, 2016.

2016 P T D 1328

HONDA ATLAS CAR PAKISTAN LTD. Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others

Court: Lahore High Court
PTD 2014
F.E. Nos.2/KB and 3/KB of 2010, decided on 29th November, 2013.

2014 P T D (Trib

Messrs PAKISTAN BEVERAGE LTD., KARACHI Versus DCIR-09 AUDIT DIVISION-II, LTU

Court: Inland Revenue Appellate Tribunal
MLD 2016
2015-February-11

2016 M L D 349

LAHORE REGENCY (PVT.) LTD. — Petitioner Versus WYNDHAM HOTEL and others — Respondents

Court: Lahore
CLD 2016
2015-February-11

2016 C L D 606

LAHORE REGENCY (PRIVATE) LIMITED through Managing Director — Petitioner Versus WYNDHAM HOTEL through President and Managing Director and 3 others — Respondents

Court: Lahore
YLR 2016
F.A.O. No.300 of 2013, decided on 11th February, 2015.

2016 Y L R 304

LAHORE REGENCY (PVT.) LTD. — Appellant Versus WYNDHAM HOTEL and others — Respondents

Court: Lahore
CLD 2016
2015-February-11

2016 C L D 579

LAHORE REGENCY (PRIVATE) LTD. through Managing Director — Appellant Versus WYNDHAM HOTEL and others — Respondents

Court: Lahore