ASG METALS LIMITED vs The COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, ZONE-IV S — 2025 PTD 459 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation: 2025 PTD 459 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court: Sindh High Court
Year: 2025
Reporter: PTD
Parties: ASG METALS LIMITED vs The COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, ZONE-IV S
Subject matter: Civil
Provisions referred to: S. 7---C; S. 9---S; S. 11---I; S. 9; S. 7; Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908); Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990); Sales Tax Act; Civil Procedure Code; Civil Courts Ordinance

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

ASG METALS LIMITED VS The COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, ZONE-IV S. 7---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 9---Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990), S. 11---Issuance of Show-Cause Notice by the Tax Authorities, challenging of----Civil suit before the Single Bench of the High Court---Maintainability---Original Civil jurisdiction of High Court, exercising of---Show-Cause Notice was issued to the Registered Person / Company under Ss. 11(2) & 11 (3) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, whereby, it had been alleged that it was liable to pay an amount (of Rs.59,712,503/-) and as to why the same might not be assessed against it---Registered person / Company (plaintiff) impugned said Show-Cause Notice by way of filing civil suit before the Single Bench of the High Court against the Tax Authorities (defendants)---Defendants raised objection regarding maintainability of civil suit before the Single Bench of the High Court---Plea of the plaintiff was that its suit was maintainable in view of case titled Searle IV Solution (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Federation of Pakistan reported as 2018 SCMR 1444 ('the Searle IV Solution case')---Validity---In (Para 17) of the said judgment / the Searle IV Solution case, it had been observed that "it is directed, that while the Single Bench of the Sindh High Court at Karachi may still take cognizance of any suit arising out of an action/order of the tax authorities/Customs Officers, such jurisdiction must be sparingly exercised by the Single Bench"---Therefore, in view of such position present (Single Bench of High Court) was not required to mandatorily exercise such jurisdiction in tax matters on the Original Side of High Court in terms of S. 9 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 read with S. 7 of the Civil Courts Ordinance, 1962---Suit filed by registered person, being non- maintainable, was dismissed.

Other judgments reported in 2025 PTD

2025 PTD 833 INLAND REVENUE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OF PAKISTANTRADE ZONE INTERNATIONAL, ROHILA MANSION, PESHAWAR VS COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, RTO, PESHAWAR Ss. 3 & 7---Sales Tax Special Procedure (Wi…
2025 PTD 638 INLAND REVENUE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OF PAKISTANCOCA-COLA EXPORT CORPORATION PAKISTAN VS COMMISSIONER APPEALS, BALOCHISTAN REVENUE AUTHORITY Ss. 2(115), 2(139), 25 & 27(1)---Company having…
2025 PTD 540 INLAND REVENUE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OF PAKISTANCOMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, CORPORATE ZONE, RTO, PESHAWAR VS G.A. POLYMER (PVT.) LTD. Ss. 8(1)(a) & 25---SRO 490(I) /2004 dated 12-06-2004-…
2025 PTD 418 INLAND REVENUE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OF PAKISTANINSAF TEXTILE PRINTING INDUSTRIES (PVT.) LIMITED, FAISALABAD VS The COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, CORPORATE ZONE, RTO, FAISALABAD R. 34(1)(d)…
2025 PTD 292 INLAND REVENUE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OF PAKISTANMURTAZA A HASSAN VS The COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, ENFORCEMENT II CTO, KARACHI Ss. 11 & 25---Suspension and blacklisting of sales tax regi…
2025 PTD 1617 ISLAMABADCh. BASHARAT ALI HANJRA VS CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ('CDA') ISLAMABAD Implied repeal, doctrine of---Scope---When a provision of a forme…

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