Messrs POPULAR BOARDS (PVT.) LTD. vs CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SALES TAX
This appeal was filed against the judgment of the Customs, Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, which dismissed the appellant's appeal via a short order on April 25, 2002, while the detailed reasons were recorded and dispatched over two years later in August 2004. The core legal question was whether a statutory tribunal can validly dispose of an appeal by a short order, leaving the recording of detailed reasons to a subsequent, unspecified date. The Sindh High Court held that the disposal of cases by short order is the exclusive prerogative of the superior courts. All subordinate courts and tribunals are legally required to record their reasons, sign the judgment, and then announce it. Finding the procedure adopted by the Tribunal to be alien to judicial proceedings and unsustainable in law, the High Court set aside the impugned order and remanded the case to the Tribunal for a fresh hearing and disposal by a speaking order within three months.
- Is a statutory tribunal authorized to dispose of an appeal by a short order and record its detailed reasons at a subsequent date?
- Does the exclusive prerogative of disposing of cases by short orders belong solely to the superior courts?
- What is the legal consequence when a subordinate tribunal fails to record and sign its reasons at the time of announcing its decision?
ORDER
1. ' This appeal is directed against the judgment, dated 25-4-2002 passed by the Customs, Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Karachi Bench-I in S.T.A. No.K-271 of 2000.
2. ' Several questions of law have been proposed by the appellant but in view of the order proposed to be made presently, we would not like to advert to the questions proposed at the instance of the appellant.
3. ' The grievance of the appellant is that the appeal was dismissedon 25-4-2002 but the copy of the judgment was dispatched on 18-8-2004. We have called the record from the Tribunal and found that according to the order sheet the appeal was heard on 25-4-2002 and on the same date it was dismissed by a short order which reads as follows:-- "Heard arguments. The appeal is dismissed by an order separately written."
4. ' The author of the judgment is Mir Fuad, the then member Technical-I. On some subsequent date he recorded the reasons and sent it to the Member Judicial with the following endorsements.
5. "The detailed judgment duly signed is placed in the file for necessary action at your kind end please."
6. ' The procedure adopted is alien to the judicial proceedings and it appears as if the then Member Technical was dealing with the matter on administrative side, where notes are placed before the Higher Officer for appropriate orders. Be that as it may, the fact remains that the impugned order is not sustainable in law because the appeal was dismissed by a short order. Although the date of recording the reasons is not available on file but it appears that it was written somewhere in August, 2004.
7. ' We have already considered maintainability of such orders in several other matters and have held that the disposal of cases by short order is exclusive prerogative of the superior Courts and all other Courts are required to record the reasons, sign the judgment/order and then announce the same. In earlier cases we had called explanation of same Member Mir Fuad. We have been informed that member Technical Mir Fuad and member Judicial Sultan Ahmed Siddiqui both stand retired from service. We therefore, do not propose to call any explanation. However, the order is not sustainable in law which is hereby set-aside and the case is remanded to the Customs, Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Karachi Bench-I for fresh hearing after proper service on both the parties and disposal of appeal by a fresh speaking order without being influenced by the earlier order passed by the Tribunal which has been set-aside by us. Since it is a very old matter, therefore, the Tribunal is directed to dispose of the appeal within a period of three months from the date of receiving the copy of this order. Till the disposal of appeal, the demand against the appellant shall remain suspended. The appeal along with listed application stand disposed of accordingly.
Cited by 4 cases
- MUHAMMAD SALMAN vs ELECTION COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD 2019 CLC 1069
- Muhammad Salman vs Election Commission of Pakistan, Islamabad & 2019 LHC 329
- ICC TEXTILES LIMITED through Authorized Representative and 31 others vs WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (WAPDA), WAPDA HOUSE, LAHORE through Chairman and 15 others 2009 CLC 1343
- I.C.C. Textiles Limited, Lahore through its Authorised Representative Javed 2010 C.L.R. 441