THE STATE through Collector of Sales Tax vs MUHAMMAD ASHFAQ AHMED
The petitioner-State sought leave to appeal under Article 185(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, against the judgment of the High Court of Sindh, Karachi, which had observed that the prosecution could determine sales tax liability, calculate the quantum of evasion, obtain proper sanction under section 40-A(3) of the Sales Tax Act, and then initiate action. The core question before the Supreme Court was whether a time-bound direction should be issued for the determination of the sales tax liability and subsequent prosecution pursuant to the lodged F.I.R. The Supreme Court disposed of the petition with the consent of the respondents, directing the concerned Collector to determine the liability within a statutory period of four weeks, after which the petitioner would be at liberty to initiate prosecution in accordance with the law and the F.I.R. The key principle laid down is that tax liability determinations preceding prosecutions must be expedited within specified timeframes when agreed and warranted by statutory prerequisites.
- Whether the Supreme Court can direct the determination of sales tax liability within a specified timeframe?
- Is prior sanction from the Federal Government required under section 40-A of the Sales Tax Act before initiating prosecution?
- Can a petition for leave to appeal be disposed of in terms of an uncontested High Court judgment regarding tax liability determination?
- Article 185(3), Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
- Section 40-A(3), Sales Tax Act
ORDER
' M. JAVED BUTTAR, J.---The petitioner-State, through this petition under Article 185(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, is seeking leave to appeal against the judgment, dated 25-2-2004 passed by a learned Judge in Chambers of the High Court of Sindh, Karachi, the last paragraph of which reads as under:- "Before parting with the case, it is observed that the prosecution will be at liberty to determine the liability in respect of the sales tax and the quantum of evasion will also be calculated and after obtaining proper sanction in writing from the Federal Government against the applicants, as envisaged in subsection (3) of section 40-A of the Sales Tax Act and thereafter initiate action in accordance with law.
' Cr. Misc. No,461 of 2000 stands disposed of".
2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that this Court may give a direction for the determination of the liability, as held by the High Court within a specified time and thereafter the petitioner may be declared to be at liberty to initiate prosecution, in accordance with the F.I.R.
Which was lodged by the petitioner. The learned counsel representing the respondents does not oppose the above position taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner, obviously for the reason that such an order shall be in accordance with the last paragraph of the impugned judgment (reproduced above), which has not been assailed by the respondents.
3. In view of the above mentioned, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the concerned Collector to determine the liability within the statutory period of four weeks and thereafter, the petitioner shall be at liberty to initiate prosecution against the respondents, in accordance with the F.I.R. Which already stands lodged, in accordance with law. Needless to say that as time frame has been given to the Collector concerned for the determination of the liability, no party will seek unnecessary adjournments. No order as to costs.
Cited by 6 cases
- ALI SHAN vs DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE AND INVESTIGATION (IRS) 2016 PTD 2648
- ALI SHAN Versus DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE AND INVESTIGATION (IRS) KARACHI 2017 PCrLJN 189
- Khawaja SHAHBAZ AHMED vs DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF INTELLIGENCE AND INVESTIGATION, RANGE OFFICE, GUJRANWALA and another 2012 PTD 1361
- Khawaja SHAHBAZ AHMED vs DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATEGENERAL OF INTELLIGENCE AND INVESTIGATION, RANGE OFFICE, GUJRANWALA and anothers PLJ 2012 Cr.C. (Lahore) 151, 2012 PTD 1361, 2012 P Cr. L J 1378
- Mr. Khawaja Shabaz vs Deputy Director, Directorate General of Intelligence PTCL 2012 CL. 9
- KHAWAJA SHAHBAZ AHMAD vs DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF INTELLIGENCE & INVESTIGATION RANGE OFFICE GUJRANWALA and another PLJ 2012 Cr.C. (Lahore) 151