Collector Sales Tax And Federal Excise, L.T.U. vs Messrs Qasim International
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed by the Collector Sales Tax and Federal Excise against an order of the High Court. The core legal question concerns the interpretation of Section 3(1A) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, regarding the levy of further tax and its application through reference in the Sindh Sales Tax Ordinance, 2000, specifically whether incorporating a section implies the inclusion of all its sub-sections, clauses, provisos, and explanations. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal, holding that the contentions raised by the petitioner require a thorough examination of statutory interpretation principles and the applicability of previous judicial precedents. The Court directed the office to prepare the paper book for the final hearing.
- Does a reference to a particular section in a statute automatically include all its sub-sections, clauses, provisos, and explanations?
- Whether the provisions of Section 3(1A) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, require specific inclusion in the Sindh Sales Tax Ordinance, 2000, to be operative?
- Section 3(1A), Sales Tax Act 1990
- Section 3, Sindh Sales Tax Ordinance 2000
ORDER
SAIYED SAEED ASHHAD, J. --- We have heard Mr Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, learned A.S.C: for the petitioner. His contention is that the High Court has erred in holding that the provisions of Section 3(1A) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") as it charge/levying further tax and such could have been done only if Section 3 of Sindh Sales Tax Ordinance, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the "Ordinance") had specifically included the provision, of Section 3(1A) of-the Act.
He further submitted that such observation is absolutely contrary to the principles of Interpretation of Statutes according to which when a reference is made to a particular section then all parts thereof, that is to say sub-sections, clauses, provisos and ' explanations are included therein and it is not the requirement of law that each of them should be specifically mentioned. He also, submitted that the High Court fell in error in holding that., the view/observation made by it was supported by five previous decisions and submitted that all of them were distinguishable and not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. The contentions advanced require thorough examination. Accordingly, leave to appeal is granted inter alia for examination of the above questions and any other allied or connected issue which may be found necessary to be considered at the time of final hearing office is derected to prepare the paper book on the present record with liberty to the parties to file further/additional documents on their behalf, if so desired.