PAKISTAN TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. VS COLLECTOR, CUSTOMS, CENTRAL EXCISE AND SALES TAX, LAHORE and others

2005 P T D 104

[Supreme Court of Pakistan]

Present: Nazim Hussain Siddiqui, C.J., Javed Iqbal and Abdul Hameed Dogar, JJ

Messrs PAKISTAN TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. and another

Versus

COLLECTOR, CUSTOMS, CENTRAL EXCISE AND SALES TAX, LAHORE and others

Civil Review Petitions Nos.66 and 71 of 2002, decided on 17/09/2004.

(On appeal from the judgment dated 15-4-2002 of this Court passed in, Civil Appeal No.1587-1999 & C.P. No.2564-L of 2000).

(a) Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990)---

----S.2(28)---Term "General Public" occurring in S.2(28), Sales Tax Act, 1990---Meanings---"General Public" is not confined to citizens of a municipality but embraces all the people and is represented by the Legislature---Spirit of the term "General Public" is not to limit its scope but to enhance it and there is no legal justification for a narrow construction of the said term---Word "general" means relating to genus or whole class; including various species; not "Special", not restrict or "specialized" relating to the whole of to all or most.

Words and Phrases Permanent Edn. Vol.18 and Chambers English Dictionary quoted.

Goalundo Ice Association Ltd. v. Commissioners of the Rajabari Municipality PLD 1952 Dacca 12 not approved.

(b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)---

----Art.l88---Supreme Court Rules, 1980, O. XXVI --- Review of Supreme Court judgment---Points raised in the review petitions were considered and repelled in the impugned judgment---Plea that specified words had not been correctly interpreted by the Supreme Court was no ground for review as review was not for rehearing the matter.  

(c) Words and phrases---

------ General public" ---Connotation.

Words and Phrases Permanent Edn. Vol.18 and Chambers English Dictionary quoted.

(d) Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990)---

----Taxable supply---Making Taxable supply as a hotel and supply of liquor are distinct and are to be treated as such---Plea that once assessees were registered for making taxable supply as a hotel, they were not required to be registered for second time as retailers of liquor, was repelled.

Ali Sibtain Fazli, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners.

Nemo for Respondents.

Date of hearing: 17th September, 2004.

ORDER

NAZIM HUSSAIN SIDDIQUI, C.J.---This order will dispose of Civil Review Petitions Nos. 66 and 71 of 2002.

2. Civil Appeal No. 1587 of 1999 and Civil Petition No. 2564-L of. 2000 were decided on merits by this Court vide judgment, dated 15-4-2002 and its paras Nos. 11, 12 and 13 are as under:

"(11) Plea raised on behalf of the respondents has no substance for the simple reason that making taxable supply as a hotel and supply of liquor are distinct and are to be treated as such. Nothing has been brought to our notice to substantiate the plea that once they were registered for making taxable supply as a hotel, they were not required to be registered for second time, as retailers of liquor. So is permissible and can be done.

(12) This brings us to the main plea relating, to the term "General Public" appearing in section 2(28). Term "General Public" has been defined in Words and Phrases Permanent Edition Volume 18, Gabardine Gondola. It is as follows:--

General Public: The "general public" is not confined to citizens of a municipality but embraces all the people and is represented by the Legislature Rayor v. City of Cheyenne, 178 P. 2d 115, 116, 63, Wyo. 72".

(13) The spirit of above term is not to limit its scope, but to enhance it. There was no legal justification for a narrow construction of said term; as has been done by High Court. In the case reported as Goalundo Ice Association Ltd. v. Commissioners of the Rajabari Municipality (PLD 1952 Dacca 12), the word "public" as used in section 125(1)(b) of the Bengal Municipal Act was defined as "including every member of the public in general". In Chambers English Dictionary the word "General" means "relating to genus or whole class: including various species: not special" not restrict or specialized" relating to the whole of to all or most."

3. It is contended on behalf of the petitioners that the words "General Public" have not been correctly interpreted. The review is not for rehearing the matter. The points raised in these review petitions were considered and repelled in the impugned judgment, as is reflected in the paras quoted above. No case for review is made out.

4. Accordingly, the review petitions are dismissed.

M.B.A./P-20/S Petition dismissed.