| Case ID |
00a67f79-bd50-4e6c-b953-23cf0b870e4a |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
C. Ps. Nos. 3278 to 3281 of 1993 |
| Decision Date |
Aug 18, 2004 |
| Hearing Date |
Aug 18, 2004 |
| Decision |
The Sindh High Court dismissed the petitions filed by the petitioner, effectively upholding the orders imposing customs duty and sales tax on the imported Toyota vehicles. The court concluded that the exemptions claimed under the notifications dated 14-06-1984 and 12-09-1992 were not applicable as the goods were not imported against the foreign exchange allocations of the Government of Punjab. Furthermore, the court held that the insertion of section 31-A in the Customs Act and the corresponding sections in the Sales Tax Act negated the applicability of the doctrine of Promissory Estoppel in this context. The petitioner failed to demonstrate that the bills of entry were filed prior to the withdrawal of the exemption, thereby making the exemption claims untenable. Additionally, the contention that the petitioner acted merely as an agent for the Government of Punjab was unsupported by the records, as the bill of entry was filed in the petitioner's name. Consequently, the burden of tax remained with the petitioner under section 3(3) of the Sales Tax Act, and the court dismissed the petitions with a short order dated 18-08-2004. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case cited as 2008 SLD 319 and 2008 PTCL 283, the Sindh High Court deliberated on the applicability of customs duty and sales tax exemptions for imported Toyota vehicles by the petitioner. The case, referenced under C. Ps. Nos. 3278 to 3281 of 1993 and heard on August 18, 2004, revolved around the petitioner’s claim of exemption from paying customs duty and sales tax based on notifications issued on June 14, 1984, and September 12, 1992. The petitioner argued that these exemptions should apply as the imports were made by a third party for the Government of Punjab. However, the court scrutinized the validity of these exemptions, especially in light of the insertion of section 31-A in the Customs Act, 1969, and corresponding sections in the Sales Tax Act, 1990, which effectively nullified the doctrine of Promissory Estoppel previously relied upon in the AI-Samrez case (PTCL 1987 CL. 99). The court found that the exemptions were not applicable since the goods were not imported against the foreign exchange allocations of the Government of Punjab, and the bills of entry were filed in the petitioner’s name, not as an agent for the government. Additionally, the court referenced the Molasses Trading and Export v. Federation of Pakistan case (PT CL 1994 CL. 222) to emphasize that the legislative amendments had clarified that no exemptions could be claimed based on past and closed transactions once section 31-A was inserted. The petitioner’s arguments regarding the exemption of the Government’s property under Article 165 of the Constitution were also dismissed due to lack of supporting evidence. Consequently, the burden of tax was rightfully placed on the petitioner under section 3(3) of the Sales Tax Act, and the petitions were dismissed. This case underscores the critical interplay between legislative amendments and judicial doctrines in tax exemption claims, reinforcing the precedence of statutory provisions over previously established legal principles. For businesses and legal practitioners, this judgment highlights the necessity of adhering to current legislative frameworks and the potential limitations of relying on outdated legal doctrines for tax exemptions. The decision serves as a pivotal reference for future cases involving customs and sales tax exemptions, providing clarity on the applicability of statutory sections in determining tax liabilities. Keywords: Sindh High Court case, customs duty exemption, sales tax Act 1990, section 31-A Customs Act, Promissory Estoppel doctrine, AI-Samrez case, Molasses Trading case, tax liability Pakistan, Government of Punjab imports, legal precedent tax law, constitutional tax immunity, Sales of Goods Act section 64-A, tax burden on importers, legal impact of Finance Act 1998, tax exemption notifications Pakistan, high court judgments Pakistan, legal analysis customs and tax, taxation law Pakistan, legislative amendments tax law. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Government of Punjab,
Toyota Ravi Motors,
Indus Motor Company Limited,
Home Department Govt. of the Punjab,
Toyota Hilux Double Cabin Pick-Ups,
Messrs Toyota Ravi Motors,
Messrs Indus Motor Company Limited Karachi
|
| Judges |
MR., JUSTICE SABIHUDDIN AHMAD,
MR., JUSTICE ARIF HUSSAIN KHILJI
|
| Lawyers |
Mr. I.H. Zaidi
|
| Petitioners |
Not available
|
| Respondents |
Mr. Nadeem Azhar, Deputy Attorney-General
|
| Citations |
2008 SLD 319,
2008 PTCL 283
|
| Other Citations |
AI-Samrez case (PTCL 1987 CL. 99),
Molasses Trading and Export v. Federation of Pakistan (PT CL 1994 CL. 222),
M.Y. Electronics Industries v. Government of Pakistan (PTCL 1998 CL. 450)
|
| Laws Involved |
Customs Act, 1969,
Constitution of Pakistan Olympic Association,
Sales Tax Act, 1990,
Sales of Goods Act
|
| Sections |
19,
31-A,
165,
3,
3(3)(b),
6,
6(1),
6(1-A),
64-A
|