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

COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, ZONE-III, RTO, FAISALABAD vs KAMAL TEXTILE MILLS, FAISALABAD Ss — 2022 PTD 1435 INLAND REVENUE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OF PAKISTAN

Case information

Citation
2022 PTD 1435 INLAND REVENUE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OF PAKISTAN
Year
2022
Reporter
PTD
Parties
COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, ZONE-III, RTO, FAISALABAD vs KAMAL TEXTILE MILLS, FAISALABAD Ss
Subject matter
Tax & Customs
Provisions referred to
S. 8; Sales Tax Act; Finance Act

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

COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, ZONE-III, RTO, FAISALABAD VS KAMAL TEXTILE MILLS, FAISALABAD Ss.3, 8 & 11---SRO No.490(I)/2004---SRO No.450(I)/2013---Tax credit not allowed---Assessment of tax and recovery of tax not levied or short levied or erroneously refunded---Retrospective application---Scope---Department on the basis of three separate show-cause notices sought explanation of certain discrepancies which were detected during the post refund audit of the registered person---Adjudication proceedings culminated in passing of order-in-original---Appeal filed by registered person before the Commissioner (Appeals) was accepted---Validity---Input tax paid on cement, paint, thermopolis, re-touching emulsion, consumer panel. SSR, etc. was not hit by SRO No.490(I)/2004 dated 12th June, 2004 as the restriction on input tax adjustment or credit thereon was subsequently imposed by way of an amending Notification No. SRO No.450(I)/2013 dated 27th May, 2013---Contrarily, registered person's input tax credits on such items pertained to the tax periods of October 2011, May, 2012 and September, 2012 prior to imposition of such restriction on input tax credit or adjustment---Provisions of SRO No.490(I)/2004 dated 12th June, 2004, as stood prior to 27th May, 2013, never debarred a registered person from claiming input tax on such goods as alleged in impugned cases---Amendments made in S.8(1)(a) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, by way of inserting clauses (h) and (i) through Finance Act, 2014, could not be allowed to apply retrospectively when there was no such express or apparent legislative intent to allow any such retrospection---Order impugned by the department being based on facts and strictly in accordance with law did not call for any interference by the Tribunal---Appeals were dismissed.

Other judgments reported in 2022 PTD

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