Messrs KEEP & CARRY COMPANY vs DEPUTY COLLECTOR (ADJUDICATION), SALES TAX and another
This 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 unexplained delay in filing. The core legal question is whether the Appellate Tribunal should condone a negligible delay in filing an appeal where the assessee's conduct is not contumacious. The Lahore High Court held that unless an assessee is contumacious, a prayer for condonation of delay in filing appeals should be considered objectively, particularly because the assessee does not stand to gain from delay and no valuable right accrues to the Revenue. The Court laid down the principle that discretionary powers regarding limitation under fiscal statutes should be exercised liberally to advance substantial justice, directing that the delay be condoned and the appeal be decided on merits.
- Whether the Appellate Tribunal should condone a negligible delay in filing an appeal under the Sales Tax Act, 1990?
- How should a prayer for condonation of delay in filing an appeal be considered when the assessee is not contumacious?
- Does a delay in filing an appeal create a valuable right in favour of the Revenue?
- Section 46, Sales Tax Act 1990
- Section 46(2), Sales Tax Act 1990
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. 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 communicayion 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 or creates 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 be heard and decided on merits in accordance with law after hearing both the parties. .
Cited by 5 cases
- Messrs Mushtaq Hussain vs The Additional Collector of Customs 2023 PTD (Trib.) 778
- Rana MUHAMMAD FAROOQ vs C.I.R., R.T.O.-II, LAHORE 2015 PTD (Trib.) 2283
- Messrs ZIS TEXTILE (PVT.) LTD., FAISALABAD vs COMMISSIONER INLAND 2012 PTD (Trib.) 370
- Sh. ZAFAR ABBAS and 4 others vs SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD 2011 PTD 1196
- Versus Ch. Anwaar-ul-Haq , Rana Javed Iqbal 2008 PTD 859