PERVEZ AFTAB Versus EXCISE AND TAXATION OFFICER

1. AJMAL MIAN, C J.‑‑The Petitioner has impugned the orders dated 30‑3‑1980 and 18‑5‑1982 passed by the respondents No.1 and 2 respectively. The brief facts leading to the filing of the above petition are that the petitioner is the owner of a cinema. On 8‑3‑1980 (sic) the tickets and found that there was evasion of excise duty to the extent of Rs.24. The petitioner was issued a show‑cause notice. After hearing the petitioner, the impugned order dated 30‑3‑1980 was passed by the respondent No.1 against which the petitioner filed an appeal which was dismissed by the respondent No.2 by the aforesaid impugned order dated 18 5‑1982. The petitioner has, therefore, filed the present petition.

2. Mr. Fareedi the learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that even if it is to be held that there was alleged evasion of the excise duty of Rs.24 A the maximum penalty could have been Rs.500 or a sum not more than five times, as per section 6 of the West Pakistan Entertainment Duty Act 1958 which contention seems to be correct as in the impugned orders the amount of penalty imposed is Rs.800 and not Rs.500.

3. We would therefore, allow the petition and declare that the impugned order beyond Rs.500 is without lawful authority and of no legal effect. There will be no order as to cost.

4. M.Y.H./P‑123/K Petition allowed.