J.D. W. SUGAR MILLS LTD. through Executive Director, Finance VS GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Finance
2008 P T D 313
[Lahore High Court]
Before Nasim Sikandar and Kh. Farooq Saeed, JJ
J.D. W. SUGAR MILLS LTD. through Executive Director, Finance---Petitioner
Versus
GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Finance and 9 others---Respondents
S.T.R. No. 132 of 2007, decided on 17/01/2007.
Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990)---
----Ss.46, 47 & 48---Appeal to High Court---Maintainability---Recovery notice---Appellate Tribunal had found that appeal against recovery notice was not maintainable---Said order of the Tribunal had been challenged in appeal before the High Court---Scope---Tribunal had rightly found that neither appeal before the Tribunal against recovery notice was competent nor the order of the Tribunal rejecting appeal was further assailable before the High Court under S.47 of Sales Tax Act, 1990---After recording of the order-in-original, a demand stood created against assessee and issuance of a notice of recovery was- certainly in continuation of the order-in-original---There being an order-in-original, the recovery notice was mere a step in furtherance thereof, which was not open to challenge before the Tribunal---Order of the Tribunal regarding non-maintainability of appeal against recovery notice, was approved and since no question of law could be said to have arisen out of the order to be considered by the High Court under S.47 of Sales Tax Act, 1990, appeal was dismissed by the High Court.
Ijaz Ahmed Awan for Petitioner.
Izharul Haq Sheikh for Revenue.
ORDER
This further appeal under section 47 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 seeks to challenge an order of the Customs, Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench-I, Lahore, dated 30-4-2007. Ti:rqugh that order learned members of the Tribunal found that the appeal against recovery notice, dated 28-3-2002 was not maintainable before them.
2. Learned counsel for the respondent/revenue states and we will agree that neither the appeal before the Tribunal against the said recovery notice was competent nor the order of the Tribunal rejecting that appeal is further assailable before this Court under section 47 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990.
3. It is not disputed that an order-in-original was recorded against the petitioner by the concerned Collector (Adjudication) on 30-9-2000. The appeal against that order was taken to the Tribunal which was decided on 10-4-2002 where-after the appellant filed an appeal before this Court which is still pending. After recording of the order-in-original, dated 30-9-2000 a demand stood created against the petitioner and issuance of a notice of recovery was certainly in continuation of the order-in-original. There being an order-in-original the recovery notice, dated, 28-3-2002 was mere a step in furtherance thereof and therefore was not open to challenge before the learned Tribunal. Accordingly the view adopted by them against the maintainability of appeal is approved.
4. It needs to be mentioned here that section 46 providing for appeal to the appellate Tribunal makes a specific mention of the orders passed by . the Collector and Addl. Collector of Sales Tax Act with reference to certain specific sections which are assailable before the Tribunal. According to section 47 of the Sales Tax Act as it existed at the relevant time an appeal laid before this Court only in respect of a question of law arising out of an order of the Tribunal recorded under section 46 of the Act.
5. Since, as mentioned above, we have approved the order of the Tribunal regarding non-maintainability of appeal against recovery notice and since no question of law can be said to have arisen out of the order to be considered by this Court under section 47 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, this appeal shall be dismissed in limine.
H.B.T.J-18/LAppeal dismissed.