GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, MINISTRY OF COMMERCE, ISLAMABAD And Another vs M_S. MURREE BREWERY CO. LTD., RAWALPINDI
This matter involves a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, which had allowed a writ petition filed by the respondent company. The respondent had challenged an order by the Government of Pakistan rejecting an appeal against a tax assessment related to War Risks Insurance. The High Court had ruled in favor of the respondent, relying on the Supreme Court's previous decision in Messrs New Jubilee Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Enquiry Officer War Risks Insurance, which declared certain provisions of the War Risks Insurance Rules, 1971, ultra vires. The petitioner contends that the High Court misapplied this precedent, arguing that the assessment in the present case was based on Explanation-I (i.e) of Rule 7 of the War Risks Insurance Rules, 1971, rather than the specific provision (Explanation-I (iv)) that was struck down in the cited precedent. Finding that this contention requires detailed examination, the Supreme Court grants leave to appeal to determine whether the assessment provision in question remains valid and distinct from the provision previously declared ultra vires.
- Whether the assessment provision under Explanation-I (i.e) of Rule 7 of the War Risks Insurance Rules, 1971, was declared ultra vires by the Supreme Court in the case of Messrs New Jubilee Insurance Co. Ltd.?
- Does the invalidation of Explanation-I (iv) of Rule 7 of the War Risks Insurance Rules, 1971, automatically invalidate other sub-clauses within the same rule?
- Rule 7, War Risks Insurance Rules 1971
- Section 1, Income-tax Act 1922
ORDER
1. SAIDUZZAMAN SIDDIQUI, .J.---The petitioners are seeking leave to appeal against the judgment of Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench. Dated 18-5-1994 whereby Writ Petition No, 12243 of 1980 filed by respondent company to challenge the order of petitioner No. l rejecting the appeal of the respondent company against the assessment made by respondent No.2 was allowed in view of the pronouncement of this Court in the case of Messrs New Jubilee Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Enquiry Officer War Risks Insurance and another (1985 SCM R 1317).
2. The learned Deputy Attorney-General in seeking leave to appeal against the judgment of High Court contends before us that the learned Judge in Chambers misread the judgment of this Court in the case of Messrs New Jubilee Insurance Co. Ltd. (supra) as in that case only Explanation-I (iv) to rule 7 of the War Risks Insurance Rules, 1971 was declared ultra vires by this Court. The learned Dy.
3. Attorney-General further contended that in the present case, the petitioners were not demanding the War Insurance Premium on basis of the assessment made under Explanation-I (iv) of Rule 7 (ibid), but the assessm ent was based on Explanation-I (i.e) of rule 7 which reads as follows: "(i.e) in case of a factory, the sum equal to the approximate cost price to the owner on the date of application of similar new plant, machinery, building and other components of the factory less depreciation on such cost price calculated according to the rates prescribed under the Income--- tax Act, 1922 (XI of 1922) for the period for which the asset has been in use, provided that the minimum insurable value shall not be less than 25% of the value of similar property, when new;"
4. The learned Deputy Attorney-Generel contended that explanation. I (i.e) of Rule 7 has not been declared as ultra vires in the case of M/s. New Jubilee Insurance Co. Ltd. (supra), referred to in the impugned judgment. The contention raised by the Deputy Attorney-General requires examination and we, accordingly, grant leave to appeal to consider the same.