FRIGZ FOODS SIALKOT CANTT vs COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) PRA, LAHORE Ss — 2021 PTD 443 APPELLATE-TRIBUNAL-PUNJAB

Case information

Citation: 2021 PTD 443 APPELLATE-TRIBUNAL-PUNJAB
Year: 2021
Reporter: PTD
Parties: FRIGZ FOODS SIALKOT CANTT vs COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) PRA, LAHORE Ss
Subject matter: Tax & Customs

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

FRIGZ FOODS SIALKOT CANTT VS COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) PRA, LAHORE Ss. 24, 63 & 65---Punjab Sales Tax on Services (Adjudication and Appeals) Rules, 2012, Rr. 9 & 16---Assessment of tax---Appeal to Commissioner (Appeals)---Decision in appeal---Examination of records, evidences---Duty of Commissioner (Appeals)---Scope---Show-cause notice issued to the appellant alleged that it being franchisee had deposited certain amounts in the Bank account of the franchiser on account of royalty and advertisement, etc---Additional Commissioner, on failure of appellant to file any reply, passed the assessment order---Appeal filed against said order was dismissed---Validity---Appellant had failed to file any reply or submit any documents before the Additional Commissioner, but in total contrast to the admitted fact, the Commissioner (Appeals) in his order had stated that impugned order was passed after taking into account the contentions and documents produced by the appellant before the Additional Commissioner---Observation of the Commissioner (Appeals) was sufficient to hold that the Commissioner (Appeals) did not look into the record rather the order was passed merely on the basis of his imagination---Commissioner (Appeals) had mentioned the arguments of the appellant in the opening paragraph of his order but had failed to dilate upon the grounds of the appellant i.e. double taxation, wrong calculation of tax liability and paying of tax by the appellant throughout the period of alleged default---Order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) did not fulfill the requirements of the adjudication rules---Case was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for decision afresh.

Other judgments reported in 2021 PTD

2021 PTD 892 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORECHENAB FLOUR AND GENERAL MILLS VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN Ss. 2(a), 4 & Preamble---Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001), S.2(8)---Sales Tax Ac…
2021 PTD 892 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORECHENAB FLOUR AND GENERAL MILLS VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN Delegated/subordinate legislation---'Notifications' as a form of delegated legislat…
2021 PTD 892 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORECHENAB FLOUR AND GENERAL MILLS VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN art. 199 & Pt. II, Chapt. 1---Fiscal notification---Constitutional jurisdiction of…
2021 PTD 892 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORECHENAB FLOUR AND GENERAL MILLS VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN art. 199 & Pt. II, Chap. 1---Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court---Scope-…
2021 PTD 892 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORECHENAB FLOUR AND GENERAL MILLS VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN Delegated/subordinate legislation, vires of---Strong presumption of constitutionali…
2021 PTD 871 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREPUNJAB SMALL INDUSTRIES, RAWALPINDI VS DEPUTY COLLECTOR ADJUDICATION S.24-a---Reasons to be stated for decision---Scope---Order passed by ju…

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English