NAWAB BROTHERS STEEL MILLS (PVT.) LTD. vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Ministry of Finance Ss — 2024 PTD 256 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation: 2024 PTD 256 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court: Sindh High Court
Year: 2024
Reporter: PTD
Parties: NAWAB BROTHERS STEEL MILLS (PVT.) LTD. vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Ministry of Finance Ss
Subject matter: Tax & Customs
Provisions referred to: S. 7; S. 10

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

NAWAB BROTHERS STEEL MILLS (PVT.) LTD. VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Ministry of Finance Ss.7, 7a, 8, 8B & 10---Sales Tax Special Procedure Rules 2007, R.5H---Sale tax, collection of---Import of machinery---Petitioners were manufacturers of steel products and were aggrieved by imposition and collection of sales tax at the rate of 17% on import of their plant and machinery---Plea raised by petitioners / manufacturers was that they were governed by virtue of S. 7a of Sales act, 1990 read with R. 58H of Sales Tax Special Procedure Rules, 2007, having substitute mechanism at import stage---Validity---Right course available to petitioners / manufacturers was to approach Federal Board of Revenue prior to import of their goods to seek any exemption on import of their plant and machinery---When no response was received, petitioners/manufacturers rushed to High Court with their interpretation regarding R. 58H of Sales Tax Special Procedure Rules 2007, but this was not warranted---Mechanism for refund of excess Input Tax was provided under S. 10 of Sales Tax act, 1990---If any sales tax paid by petitioners / manufacturers at import stage, otherwise qualified as their input tax within the ambit of Sales Tax act, 1990 including but not limited to restrictions per Ss. 7 & 8 of Sales Tax act, 1990, then petitioners / manufacturers had a case to seek refund of any excess input tax in accordance with law---High Court in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction declined to exercise discretion in favour of petitioners---Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2024 PTD

2024 PTD 889 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORECOMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE VS MUHAMMAD OSMAN GUL Fourth Sched., Entries 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52 & 53---Federal Legislative List---Taxes and…
2024 PTD 1422 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTCitation Name: 2024 PTD 1422 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case FRONTIER GREEN WOOD INDUSTRIES (PVT.) LTD VS COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE,…
2024 PTD 889 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORECOMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE VS MUHAMMAD OSMAN GUL Reading down, principle of---Applicability---Rule of reading down has to be disapplied for…
2024 PTD 889 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORECOMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE VS MUHAMMAD OSMAN GUL S.2(29) [as amended by Finance Act (I of 2003)]---Phrase "any amount treated as income und…
2024 PTD 889 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORECOMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE VS MUHAMMAD OSMAN GUL Fourth Sched., Federal Legislative List, Entry 47---Term "income"---Connotation---Term "in…
2024 PTD 889 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORECOMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE VS MUHAMMAD OSMAN GUL S. 2(29)---Term, "income"---Meaning---Resort cannot be made to definition of 'income' as g…

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