| Case ID |
38944548-56f5-4d7d-b382-fb3a4968415c |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
S.T.A. No.284/IB of 2012 |
| Decision Date |
Jul 03, 2013 |
| Hearing Date |
May 28, 2013 |
| Decision |
The Appellate Tribunal upheld the remand order of the learned Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals-I), confirming that the taxpayer was not given a reasonable opportunity to present their case. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of fair hearing and the verification of records, especially concerning output tax discrepancies. The decision aligned with the provisions of the Sales Tax Act, ensuring that the taxpayer was not subjected to double jeopardy. The appeal by the department was dismissed, reinforcing the authority of the Appellate Authority to remand cases for further examination when necessary. |
| Summary |
In the case of S.T.A. No.284/IB of 2012, the Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue, Islamabad, addressed the appeal filed by the Commissioner Inland Revenue against the decision of the learned Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals-I). The central issue revolved around the remand of a case for further examination based on the argument that the taxpayer was not provided a reasonable opportunity to present their case. The Tribunal highlighted the provisions of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, specifically Section 45B, which grants the Appellate Authority the power to remand cases for de novo consideration when deemed necessary. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of ensuring that taxpayers are treated fairly and are not subjected to double jeopardy. The decision reinforces the principle that the Appellate Authority must act judiciously, providing clear findings based on thorough inquiries. This case not only underscores the procedural safeguards in tax law but also reflects the ongoing commitment to uphold taxpayer rights within the legal framework. Keywords include Sales Tax Act, Appeals, Taxpayer Rights, Inland Revenue, and Fair Hearing. |
| Court |
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue
|
| Entities Involved |
COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE,
AIRBLUE LIMITED
|
| Judges |
JAWAID MASOOD TAHIR BHATTI,
FAHIM-UL-HAQ KHAN
|
| Lawyers |
Not available
|
| Petitioners |
COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, LTU, ISLAMABAD
|
| Respondents |
AIRBLUE LIMITED, ISLAMABAD
|
| Citations |
2013 SLD 1918,
2013 PTD 2219
|
| Other Citations |
CIT v. Walchand and Co., AIR 1967 SC 1435,
Babulal Nagar v. Shree Synthetics Ltd., AIR 1984 SC 1164,
Narendra Sing v. Chhotey Singh AIR 1983 SC 990,
Central Camera Co., (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Government of Madras, (1971) 27 S.T.C. 112 (Mad.),
CIT v. Assam Travels Shipping Service 1993 PTD 885
|
| Laws Involved |
Sales Tax Act, 1990
|
| Sections |
45B
|