Pakistan Case Law
2002 PTD 506

Messrs HASEEB WAQAS SUGAR MILLS LIMITED through Chief Executive vs THE COLLECTOR, SALES TAX, LAHORE and 2 others

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2002 PTD 506
CourtLahore High Court
Judge(s)Naseem Sikandar and Muhammad Saeed Akhtar
Authored byNaseem Sikandar
ResultOrder accordingly
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This civil appeal arises from an order of the Appellate Tribunal dismissing the appellant's appeal under section 46 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 due to an unexplainable delay in filing. The core legal question concerns the exercise of discretion by the Appellate Tribunal under section 46(2) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 to condone a delay in filing an appeal. The Lahore High Court held that unless an assessee is shown to be contumacious, a prayer for condonation of delay should be considered objectively, keeping in mind that a delayed appeal does not benefit the assessee or create a valuable right for the Revenue. The court concluded that a minor or negligible delay in filing the appeal ought to have been condoned. The appeal is accordingly allowed, and the matter is remanded to the Tribunal to be decided on merits.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Whether the Appellate Tribunal should consider a prayer for condonation of delay objectively when the delay is negligible?
  • Does a delay in filing an appeal by an assessee create any valuable right in favour of the Revenue?
  • Can an appeal be dismissed on limitation grounds without establishing contumacious conduct on the part of the assessee?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Section 46, Sales Tax Act 1990
  • Section 46(2), Sales Tax Act 1990
sales tax appealcondonation of delaylimitation periodAppellate Tribunaldiscretionary powers

GMENT NASEEM SIKANDAR, J.-- The appeal filed by the appellant before the Appellate Tribunal under section 46 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 was dismissed after it was found that the delay in filing thereof had not been properly explained.

2, Although the Tribunal has not mentioned the exact time in terms of days by which the appeal before them was barred by limitation, we are of the view that it was negligible. In a recent judgment in C.A. No.323 of 2001 we have examined the provisions of section 46 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 which provide for appeal to the Customs Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal within 30 days of the date of communication of the order. In that order we have examined the jurisdiction of the Tribunal under subsection (2) of section 46 of the Act which allows them a discretion to admit any appeal preferred after the period of limitation.

3. For various reasons stated in the order this Court expressed the view that unless an assessee was contumacious a prayer for condonation of delay in filing appeals should be considered objectively. Particularly for the reason that by delaying an appeal the assessee does not stand to gain anything nor a delay on his part gives rise to br creates a valuable right in favour of the Revenue. Therefore, we directed that the delay of 43 days in filing of the appeal ought to have been condoned.

4. For different reasons contained in that order we will allow this appeal as well. Resultantly, the appeal filed by the appellant before the Tribunal shall be deemed pending which will he heard and decided on merits in accordance with law after hearing both the parties.

Cited by 7 cases

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.