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

Citation Name: 2023 PTD 56 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA, REVENUE AUTHORITY (KPRA) vs LEGACY PHARMACEUTICAL (PVT — 2023 PTD 56 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Citation
2023 PTD 56 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT
Court
Peshawar High Court
Year
2023
Reporter
PTD
Parties
Citation Name: 2023 PTD 56 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA, REVENUE AUTHORITY (KPRA) vs LEGACY PHARMACEUTICAL (PVT
Subject matter
Civil
Provisions referred to
S. 86; S. 5---S; Limitation Act (IX of 1908)

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

Citation Name: 2023 PTD 56 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA, REVENUE AUTHORITY (KPRA) VS LEGACY PHARMACEUTICAL (PVT.) LIMITED, PESHAWAR amending act---Retrospective effect---Principle---Where Legislature has made its intention clear that amending act should have a retrospective effect / operation, it must be so construed, even though consequence may entail hardship to a party. Citation Name: 2023 PTD 56 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA, REVENUE AUTHORITY (KPRA) VS LEGACY PHARMACEUTICAL (PVT.) LIMITED, PESHAWAR Fiscal statute---Amendment---Effect---Amendment in fiscal statute has always prospective effect unless retrospective effect is given to it by the Legislature. Citation Name: 2023 PTD 56 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA, REVENUE AUTHORITY (KPRA) VS LEGACY PHARMACEUTICAL (PVT.) LIMITED, PESHAWAR S.86(2)---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S.5---Sales Tax on services---Reference to High Court---Limitation---Condonation of delay---Sales Tax Reference was filed beyond stipulated period of sixty days---Order in question was passed on 12-04-2022, certified copy was issued to authorities on 15-04-2022, whereas Reference application was filed on 07-07-2022---Effect---Sales Tax Reference was barred by 24 days---Object of law of limitation was to help the vigilant and not the indolent---Law of limitation was required to be construed strictly---Each day of delay was to be explained by the party concerned---Government department could not be treated differently than private individual on the question of limitation---Authorities failed to offer any plausible explanation for condonation of delay in their application---Negligence to file Sales Tax Reference must have its reward to punish the indolent---High Court declined to condone the delay in filing of Sales Tax Reference---Reference was dismissed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2023 PTD

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