Finance Act (V of 1989)---

----S. 7--Levy of tax on capital value of certain assets--Appeal to Appellate Tribunal---Validity---Appellate Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear the appeal filed under Capital Value Tax Act, as the law did not provide for the same---Language of Corporate Asset Tax Act provided under S.9 the right of appeal against the order of the Assessing Officer by specifying that the provisions of Ss. 23, 24, 25 & 35 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1963 shall so far as may be, apply to an appeal, revision or rectification of an order, under such section as they apply .to an appeal, revision or rectification under the said Act---No such saving had been provided in the Capital Value Tax Act which was a special law and needed strict compliance---Nothing could be imported beyond its intendments---Law was to be applied as it appeared from the plain reading of the language---Department having come to a wrong forum Registrar of the Tribunal was directed by the Appellate Tribunal to de-list the appeal from the record.

Muhammad Asif, D.R. for Appellant.

Date of hearing: 6th November, 2002.

ORDER

KHAWAJA FAROOQ SAEED (JUDICIAL MEMBER).---This appeal is against the order of the CIT (Appeal-I), Faisalabad decided by him against assessment finalized under Capital Value Tax promulgated by section 7 of the Finance Act, 1989. The petitioner is the Department of Income-tax.

It was asked from the learned D.R. as to under what provision of the Capital Value Tax Act this appeal has been filed to which he said that the same is under Wealth Tax Act. He argued that under section 7 of the said Act is working and monitoring is assigned to the Wealth Tax Authorities. It was again confronted to him that the C.V.T. which was levied under section 7 of the Finance Act, 1989 and was subsequently amended by Finance Act, 1990 and 1992 does not contain any right of appeal against the wrong charge of Capital Value Tax. He practically conceded that apparently there is no provision, which provides for an appeal against charge created therein. He remarked that even the first appeal has been finalized under a misconception, as the CIT had no authority to entertain and decide an appeal against an order under, C. V. T.

Capital Value Tax is totally independent enactment and except for assigning administrative jurisdiction to the W.T.O. it has not protected any other provision of the Wealth Tax Act. The act has not provided any appeal against the wrongful charge of this tax. However, through an amendment by the Finance Act, 1997 section (8A) was inserted. Section (8A) provided power to the Commissioner of Wealth Tax who holds jurisdiction over the ease of the assessee to revise the order. This provision obviously does not provide any right of appeal as the same speaks of revising of the order by the CIT on an application by the assessee against the order under section 8 of the C. V. T.

The fate of the petition by the department before us is obvious. ITAT does not hold any jurisdiction to listen the appeals filed under Capital Value Tax Act, as the law does not provide for any such instruction. One can take strength from the language of C.A.T. wherein under section 9 right of appeal has been provided against the order of the Assessing Officer by specifying that the provisions of sections 23, 24, 25 and 35 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1963 (XV of 1963), shall, so far as may be, apply to an appeal against, or revision or rectification of, an order under this section as they apply to an appeal, revision or rectification under the said Act. No such saving has been provided in the C.V.T. law.

It goes without saying that it is a special law, which needs strict compliance of the letters. There is no room for importing beyond intentments. Law is to be applied as it appears from the plain reading of the language. The department has come to a wrong forum. The registration, therefore; is directed to de-list this appeal from its record.

C.M.A./629/Tax (Trib.) Appeal dismissed.