PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

SANOFI-AVENTIS PAKISTAN LIMITED vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN Ss — 2022 PTD 1205 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation
2022 PTD 1205 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court
Sindh High Court
Year
2022
Reporter
PTD
Parties
SANOFI-AVENTIS PAKISTAN LIMITED vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN Ss
Subject matter
Tax & Customs
Provisions referred to
S. 148; S. 80; Income Tax Ordinance

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

SANOFI-AVENTIS PAKISTAN LIMITED VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN Ss.80 & 148---Drugs (Import and Export) Rules, 1976, R. 13---Imports---Person---Import of drugs for personal use---Scope---Petitioners imported finished pharmaceutical products, which at the relevant time required certification from Drug Regulatory Authority of Pakistan (DRAP) for claiming a reduced rate of deduction of income tax under S. 148 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, to be collected by the Customs authorities---When DRAP was approached for such certification, the impugned letter was issued on the ground that S.80 of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, was only relevant for persons importing finished pharmaceutical products under R.13 of the Drugs (Import and Export) Rules, 1976---Held; it was never a business of DRAP to interpret the word "person" appearing in S. 80 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 nor the certification was for such purposes---Rather, it was only for and to the extent of, that it was a finished pharmaceutical product not being manufactured locally---Whether the importer was a "person" within the meaning of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, or not was not required to be determined by DRAP nor it fell in their domain---Rule 13 of Drugs (Import and Export) Rules, 1976, had no relevance as it was in respect of and applied to persons importing drugs for personal use in small quantities and not as commercial imports---Section 80 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 very clearly defined a "person", which included an individual as well as a company and therefore, impugned letter of DRAP was not in consonance with the relevant provisions of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001---Impugned letter was set aside to that extent; however, certification that it was a finished pharmaceutical product not being manufactured locally would still be required to be obtained from DRAP---Constitutional petitions were allowed.

Other judgments reported in 2022 PTD

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