SHAKARGANJ FOOD PRODUCTS LIMITED vs FEDERAL BOARD OF REVENUE Ss — 2025 PTD 659 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

SHAKARGANJ FOOD PRODUCTS LIMITED VS FEDERAL BOARD OF REVENUE Ss. 10 & 26---Clause 6 of the digital sales tax returns i.e. "credit brought forward from previous tax year", modifying/amending of---Scope---Unilateral action of the Department---Notice(s), issuing of---Pre-requisites---Petitioners (registered persons) assailed Notices before the High Court---Question as to whether the respondents/Department could unilaterally modify/amend the tax return of the petitioners without issuing any prior Show-Cause Notice to them---Argument of the respondents / Department was that the amounts for which the petitioners ought to have claimed refund in terms of S. 10(1) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 and the amounts which they could have brought forward as credit in terms of the first proviso to S. 10(1) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 were mentioned in the notices impugned as the petitioners had wrongly reflected the amounts in Cl. 6 which could not be brought forward---Validity---Petitioners were deprived of the due process to which they were entitled as notices-in-question did not depict the provision of law under which they had been issued---Similarly, the provision of law under which action was required to be taken against the petitioners was also absent in the notices-in-question---Petitioners ought to know the action that was proposed to be taken against them and the notices to be issued to the petitioners must make full disclosure of the provisions of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, that were attracted to the case enabling them to counter the same---Impugned action of the respondents in unilaterally amending/modifying the tax returns could not sustain---Same was the case with the impugned notices---High Court struck down the impugned notices declaring the action of the respondents in making amendments/modifications in the tax return of the petitioner relating to Cl. 6 to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect, however, the respondents were at liberty to issue a proper Show-Cause Notice to proceed with the inquiry relating to the amounts mentioned in Cl. 6 of the tax returns---Constitutional petition, filed by registered persons, was allowed accordingly.

SHAKARGANJ FOOD PRODUCTS LIMITED vs FEDERAL BOARD OF REVENUE Ss — 2025 PTD 659 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PTD