HIRJINA & CO., (PAK.) LTD. AND Others vs ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN AND Another
This matter arose from petitions for leave to appeal filed before the Supreme Court of Pakistan challenging the levy of excise duty under section 3(1) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The petitioners contended that the excise duty levied on excisable services provided or rendered in relation to alcoholic liquor constitutes, in pith and substance, a duty on alcoholic liquor, thereby violating Entry 43(b) of the Third Schedule to the 1962 Constitution. It was further argued that levying excise duty on services rendered by hotels, restaurants, and bars is constitutionally impermissible. The Supreme Court observed that the constitutional questions raised regarding the scope of excise duty and legislative competence were of general public importance requiring an authoritative adjudication by the Court. Consequently, the Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to examine these substantial constitutional issues, directed that the appeals be heard on the present record with liberty to file additional documents, and issued notice to the Deputy Attorney-General regarding interim relief.
- Whether excise duty levied on services rendered in relation to alcoholic liquor constitutes a duty on alcoholic liquor in pith and substance?
- Whether the levy of excise duty on services provided in relation to alcoholic liquor is barred by Entry 43(b) of the Third Schedule of the 1962 Constitution?
- Whether the Constitution permits the levy of excise duty on services rendered by hotels, restaurants, and bars?
- Section 3(1), Central Excises and Salt Act 1944
- Entry 43(b), Third Schedule, Constitution of Pakistan 1962
ORDER
1. ABDUL QADIR SHAIKH, J.-Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the excise duty levied under section 3(1) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 in relation to excisable services provided or rendered in rela--petition to alcoholic liquor is in its pith and substance, a duty on "alcoholic liquor" and cannot, therefore, be levied due to the bar contained under Entry 43 (b) of the Third Schedule of the 1962 Constitution. '
2. Learned counsel further submitted that even otherwise levy of duty on services by hotel, restaurant and bar, as an excise duty, is constitutionally not permissible.
3. These and other questions raised by the learned counsel are of general public importance and deserve an authoritative decision of this Court.
4. Leave is granted and the petitions are allowed. Security Rs. 2,500 in each case. Appeals will be heard on the present record. It is, however, open to the parties to file additional documents, if any.
5. Notice of Miscellaneous Petitions for grant of interim relief to issue to the Deputy Attorney-General for a date in office.