Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: DEPUTY COLLECTOR, SALES TAX, LAHORE VS Respondent: Messrs FLYING BOARD AND PAPER PRODUCTSHonorable Justice TANVIR AHMED KHANA. Karim Malik,Irfan Qadir
2004 S C M R 828
2004 S C M R 828
[Supreme Court of Pakistan]
Present: Tanvir Ahmed Khan and Khalil‑ur‑Rehman Ramday, JJ
DEPUTY COLLECTOR, SALES TAX, LAHORE‑‑‑Petitioner
versus
Messrs FLYING BOARD AND PAPER PRODUCTS and others‑‑‑Respondents
Civil Petitions for Leave to Appeal Nos.3786‑L to 3789‑L of 2001, decided on 25th February, 2063.
(On appeal from the judgment 'dated 28‑9‑2001 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, passed in Writ Petitions Nos.5203, 5204, 5205 and 5206 of 1999).
Sales Tax Ac! (VII of 1990)‑‑‑
‑‑‑‑S.45‑A‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts. 185(3) & 199‑‑ Central Board of Revenue‑‑‑Jurisdiction‑‑‑Matter pertaining to recovery of sales tax was decided against the respondent and such order was set aside by the Collector (Appeals)‑‑‑Order passed by Collector (Appeals) was set aside by Central Board of Revenue‑‑‑High Court in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction set aside the order passed by the Board of Revenue‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Leave to appeal was granted by Supreme Court to consider; whether in the circumstances of the case the Central Board of Revenue was clothed with any authority/power under S.45‑A of Sales Tax Act, 1990, to interfere with the order of Collector (Appeals).
A. Karim Malik, Senior Advocate Supreme Court with Ch. Muhammad Aslam, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Irfan Qadir, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 25th February, 2003.
ORDER
TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J.‑Leave to appeal is sought against the judgment dated 28‑9‑2001 whereby a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, accepted the writ petitions filed by respondent No.1 and set aside the order of the Member, Central Board of Revenue, Islamabad, passed under section 45‑A of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
2. The facts briefly narrated for the disposal of these petitions are that the Directorate of Intelligence and Investigation (Customs and Excise), Regional Office, Lahore, reported against the malpractices committed by respondent No.1 in the charge of sales tax resulting into loss of huge amount to the national exchequer. The Additional Collector took up the matter and found the respondents guilty under sections 3, 6, 7 and 26 of the Act and ordered them to pay the amounts due alongwith penalties running into millions of rupees. The respondent filed an appeal before the Collector (Appeals), who accepted the same through an order dated 26‑8‑1997. The afore‑mentioned order of the Collector (Appeals) was assailed by the Director General Intelligence and Investigation (Customs and Excise), Lahore, before the Customs, Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Lahore, which was dismissed being not maintainable and held the appeal something like coram non judice. The matter was taken up by the Member (Sales Tax), Central Board of Revenue, Islamabad, in the exercise of powers under section 45‑A of the Act and after hearing the parties through his order dated 7‑7‑2000 set aside the earlier order of the Collector (Appeals) passed on 26‑8‑1997. Feeling aggrieved by the above order, respondent No. l filed aforesaid writ petitions before the Lahore High Court, Lahore, which have been accepted by a learned Single Judge through the impugned judgment. Hence, these petitions for leave to appeal.
3. It is inter alia argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Collector (Appeals) is an officer of the Sales Tax, who is appointed under section 30 of the Act read with section 2(18) thereof. He, being an officer of Sales Tax, his orders, according to the learned counsel, are amenable to the jurisdiction of the Central Board of revenue under section 45‑A of the Act. To reinforce his submissions he has placed reliance upon sections 2(18), 30, 40 and 54‑A of the Act.
4. The contentions raised above, being of first impression, need consideration. Leave to appeal is, accordingly, granted in all the petitions to give an authoritative judgment on the point, whether in the circumstances of the case in hand the Central Board of Revenue is clothed with any authority/power under section 45‑A of the Act to interfere with the orders of the Collector (Appeals).
M.H./D‑5/S Leave granted.