RAJBY INDUSTRIES KARACHI vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN Ss — 2023 SCMR 1407 SUPREME-COURT

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

RAJBY INDUSTRIES KARACHI VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN Ss. 4, Second Proviso & 8(1)(b)---Notification S.R.O. 491(I)/2016 dated 30.06.2016---Notification S.R.O. 1125(I)/2011 dated 31.12.2011, condition (x), first proviso ("the impugned proviso") [as substituted vide Notification S.R.O. 491(I)/2016 dated 30.06.2016]---Notification S.R.O. 777(I)/2018 dated 21.06.2018---Input tax adjustment---Disallowance of input tax on packing material---Withdrawal of a proviso in an SRO---Effect---Whether retrospective effect could be given to such withdrawal---In the present case the restriction imposed for reclaiming input tax on packing material by way of Notification S.R.O. 491(I)/2016 dated 30.06.2016 ('the impugned S.R.O.') was not illegal, unlawful or without jurisdiction but it was within the realm and domain of powers vested in the Federal Government under section 8 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990---Petitioners (tax payers) had only challenged the constitutionality of the 'impugned proviso', which debarred them from lodging the claim on packing material---Challenge to the legitimacy of the impugned proviso was based on a misconceived notion; the impugned proviso was intra vires and could not be construed as ultra vires to any provision of Sales Tax Act, 1990 or the Constitution---Challenge to the vires of the impugned proviso substituted vide the impugned S.R.O had subsided when vide S.R.O. 777(I)/2018 dated 21.06.2018, the impugned proviso was omitted---Although the impugned proviso was withdrawn on 21.06.2018, but in clause (2) of the S.R.O. 777(I)/2018, the withdrawal was made effective from 01.07.2018 without any express or seeming intention or language to construe that it was promulgated with retrospective effect, nor was it deemed to be a declaratory statute which came into field for rectifying any defect, omission and/or oversight in the original S.R.O. 1125(I)/2011 or S.R.O. 491(I)/2016, whereby the proviso was added and input tax credit or refund was made inadmissible on packing material of all sorts---Plea of petitioners that withdrawal of the impugned proviso should be made applicable with retrospective effect was a misconstrued notion---Petitions for leave to appeal were dismissed and leave was refused.

RAJBY INDUSTRIES KARACHI vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN Ss — 2023 SCMR 1407 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 SCMR