06.03.2018 Views

Sales Tax Instructions

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>Sales</strong> <strong>Tax</strong> <strong>Instructions</strong>, 2009<br />

legislative enactments unless ex-facie it was violative of a constitutional provision. As the laws<br />

relating to economic activities, their Lordships desired that Courts should view them with greater<br />

latitude than the laws relating to civil rights such as freedom of speech, religion etc. Also their<br />

Lordships approved reading together of various items in the legislative list in order to re-concile<br />

the powers of the legislature. Item No.49 in the Federal Legislative List provides for framing of<br />

laws to impose taxes on sales or purchases of goods etc. Such power includes the power to<br />

legislate the charging, machinery, recovery as well as penalty provisions. Item No.49 when read<br />

with items No.58 and 59 makes it otherwise clear that the legislature is competent to legislate not<br />

only on a particular subject but also on matters incidental or ancillary to those enumerated in the<br />

list. In re: Pakistan Industrial Development Corporation v. Pakistan through the Secretary,<br />

Ministry of Finance (1992 SCMR 891) it was found that items in the list in respect of which power<br />

of taxation can be exercised should not be interpreted in a restricted and pedantic manner. The<br />

objection of the petitioners, therefore, is without any basis. It is however, re-iterated that the<br />

provisions of further tax as introduced through sub-section (1-A) are neither penalty nor in the<br />

nature of penalty provisions. Since a registered person has a choice not to supply to an unregistered<br />

person, the further tax provided for may at best be a disincentive both for the registered<br />

person as well as an un-registered person. However, to call it a penalty would not be legal when<br />

the definition clause section 2(34) describes it to be a part of sales tax.<br />

18. The other contention that the amended provision is violative of Article-4 (right of<br />

individuals to be dealt with in accordance with law, Article-18 (freedom of trade business or<br />

profession), Article-24 (protection of property rights) and Article-25 (equity of citizens) is not<br />

supported by any cogent reason. It is not explained as to how the petitioners have not been dealt<br />

with in accordance with law or that any restriction was placed upon them in respect of their trade<br />

business or profession or as to how they have been discriminated against. The fact of the manner,<br />

on the other hand, is that they are fighting for an un-identified class whom they would like to<br />

protect and whose identity they would not like to be disclose. Their zeal to shield the above class<br />

rather gives support to the submissions of the revenue that these petitioners are meant to protect<br />

their alternate dealers who operate in order to suppress volume of supplies and avoid faithful<br />

maintenance of accounts. The petitioners in the face of these facts do not appear to have<br />

approached this Court with clear hands. As such they are otherwise not entitled to relief from a<br />

Court of equity.<br />

19. The case law relied upon by the Revenue and the learned Deputy Attorney General<br />

including re: V.M. Syed Muhammad and Co. v. State of Andhra (Supra) is relevant and pertinent.<br />

The aforesaid recent judgement of the Supreme Court in re: Messrs Ellahi Cotton Mills (Supra)<br />

supports case of the revenue from all possible angles.<br />

20. Accordingly, I find no substance in the submissions made for any of the four categories of<br />

the petitions. Therefore, all the above stated writ petitions should be dismissed with costs.<br />

(NASIM SIKANDAR)<br />

JUDGE<br />

********<br />

C.No.1/195-STT/99-Pt.1 DATED 7 TH DECEMBER, 1999<br />

SUBJECT:-<br />

SALES TAX EXEMPTION ALLOWED TO GHAZI BAROTHA<br />

CONTRACTORS.<br />

I am directed to refer to your letter C.No.ST/Misc/604/99-IX, dated 26.11.1999<br />

on the above subject and to say that the clause 73.4 of the Agreement signed between<br />

WAPDA and M/s Ghazi Brotha Project, as per your letter, covers only equipments and<br />

essential spare parts for the purposes of exemption from duties and taxes. ―Steel Bars‖

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!