SUMMIT CAPITAL (PVT.) LIMITED vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (UNIT-IV), SINDH REVENUE BOARD Ss — 2025 PTD 1733 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation: 2025 PTD 1733 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court: Sindh High Court
Year: 2025
Reporter: PTD
Parties: SUMMIT CAPITAL (PVT.) LIMITED vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (UNIT-IV), SINDH REVENUE BOARD Ss
Subject matter: Tax & Customs

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

SUMMIT CAPITAL (PVT.) LIMITED VS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (UNIT-IV), SINDH REVENUE BOARD Ss. 3(1), 47 (1a), 63 & Second Schedule, Tariff Heading 98-13---Reference---Sales tax on services---Online services---Trading on automated System---Taxpayers were stock brokers who had been facilitating sale and purchase of shares through their offices in Karachi and Lahore---Dispute was with regard to recovery of sales tax on earning of commission against services provided by stock exchange brokers to their clients in Lahore---Validity---"Stockbroker" and a "foreign exchange broker" does not come within the definition of any of the services as indicated in chapter of Tariff Heading 98-13 of Second Schedule to Sindh Sales Tax on Services act, 2011, nor is it a person "dealing in any such services" so as to bring it within the purview of that Tariff Heading---Such service also does not come within Heading 9813.8000 as it is admittedly not a "banker to an issue" and also cannot fall within the definition of the expression "others" as contained in Sub-Heading 9813.8100, which having to be read in the context of Heading 9813.8000 must be read as other persons who are acting as "bankers to an issue"---Economic activity that was being offered by the taxpayers was not to act as "banker to an issue" and hence the activity undertaken did not fall with the perimeters of such Tariff Heading either---High Court decided the questions in favour of taxpayers and against the authorities---Reference was disposed of accordingly.

Other judgments reported in 2025 PTD

2025 PTD 1833 BALOCHISTAN-SALES-TAX-ON-SERVICES-APPELLATE-TRIBUNAL, QUETTACASING CORPORATION (PVT.) LIMITED VS COMMISSIONER BALOCHISTAN REVENUE AUTHORITY. Ss. 2(115), 2(139), 25 & 27 - Balochistan Sales Tax on Serv…
2025 PTD 1230 SUPREME-COURTKASSIM TEXTILE MILLS (PVT.) LIMITED VS COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, KARACHI Literal rule---Legislation---Powers of Court---Where words of st…
2025 PTD 1179 SUPREME-COURTWAK LIMITED MULTAN ROAD, LAHORE VS COLLECTOR CENTRAL EXCISE AND SALES TAX, LAHORE (NOW COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, LTU, LAHORE) Statutory d…
2025 PTD 1634 SUPREME-COURTThe DIRECTORATE OF POST CLEARANCE AUDIT through DG, FBR, Islamabad VS NESTLE PAKISTAN LIMITED, ISLAMABAD art. 185(3)---Petition for leave to…
2025 PTD 1270 SUPREME-COURTDIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE AND INVESTIGATION-FBR, through Director VS TAJ INTERNATIONAL (PVT.) LTD. Ss. 2(37), 3, 11, 33 & 37a---assessment…
2025 PTD 1270 SUPREME-COURTDIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE AND INVESTIGATION-FBR, through Director VS TAJ INTERNATIONAL (PVT.) LTD. Imposing of tax---Principle---Under mod…

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