J.D.W. SUGAR MILLS LTD. Through Manager Finance VS APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SALES TAX, LAHORE, 2006 PTD-LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE 836 (2006)

Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990)---

----S. 47---Appeal to High Court---Ambiguous order of Tribunal not having expressly decided issue of levy of additional tax---Such infirmity in impugned order had resulted in allowing revenue to interpret same in .their own peculiar way---Substantial amount was being withheld by revenue for such reason---High Court accepted appeal with direction to Tribunal to record its finding on such issue.

Ijaz Ahmed Awan for Appellant.

A. Karim Malik for Revenue.

ORDER

This further appeal under section 47 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 seeks to challenge the order, dated 17-4-2002 passed by Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal Lahore. The operative part of the order reads as under : --

"The appellants again contested the calculation of additional tax made by the Auditor. Resultantly the Sales Tax Authorities at Multan were directed to re-check the calculation of additional tax in association with representative of the appellants. That reconciliation statement signed by Mr. Munir Ahmed Dahar Deputy Manager (C&B) of the appellants company along with Additional Collector and Assistant Collector Multan and Mr. Khurram Bashir Auditor, Sales Tax Rahim Yar Khan has been received. According to this jointly prepared statement the total amount of output tax from July, 98 to Jan, 99 worked out' to Rs.5,01,57,207 and after allowing input tax adjustment of Rs.15,93,310 for the months of December 98 and Jan, 99 the tax payable by the appellants for the period of July, 98 to Jan, 99 worked out to Rs.4,85,63,897 and the additional tax was Rs.82,98,857 and thus the total amount payable by the appellants was Rs.5,68,62,754. As discussed earlier, an amount of Rs.5,80,49,550 had been received from Karachi Customs and after adjusting the same against the total sales tax liabilities of Rs.5,68,754 (principal amount additional tax), the appellants had already paid in excess. In view of this the appeal is accepted and the impugned order is set aside."

2. The only grievance of the appellant is that although the learned Tribunal set aside the impugned order of Collector (Adjudication), dated 19-12-2000 yet, the Department, was placing its own interpretation of the decision given with, regard to the levy of additional tax. It is claimed that if the issue is expressly decided by the Tribunal the appellant would be entitled to a refund of more than one million rupees.

3. He submits and we will agree that the impugned order, a part whereof has been reproduced above, is somewhat ambiguous inasmuch as the issue of leviability of additional tax has not been expressly addressed or decided. That infirmity in the order has resulted in allowing the Revenue to interpret it in their own peculiar way.

4. Since a substantial sum of money is being withheld by the Revenue, for that reason alone we will allow this appeal to the extent of the issue of leviability of additional tax. The impugned order of the Tribunal shall stand set aside to that extent only. Learned Members of the Tribunal will address and record a finding if in the facts and circumstances of the case additional tax was leviable and the extent to which the appellant was liable.

5. Appeal allowed in the above terms.

S.A.K./J-3/L??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Appeal accepted.