ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR-II SALES TAX, LAHORE vs Messrs ABDULLAH SUGAR
This petition for leave to appeal challenged an interim order passed by the Lahore High Court, which suspended the recovery of sales tax against the respondent pending an appeal. The core legal question was whether the High Court possesses the jurisdiction to grant interim relief, specifically staying the recovery of tax, during the pendency of an appeal filed under Section 47 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, holding that the High Court maintains the jurisdiction to grant interim relief in such matters. The Court reasoned that while Section 47(6) mandates that tax remains payable despite an appeal, it does not expressly oust the High Court's jurisdiction to issue interim orders. The Court established the principle that ouster of jurisdiction must be express and cannot be implied. Furthermore, it affirmed the legal principle that where a court is competent to grant final relief, it inherently possesses the jurisdiction to grant interim relief. Consequently, the High Court's order suspending recovery was upheld as a valid exercise of its appellate authority.
- Does the High Court have the jurisdiction to grant interim relief staying tax recovery during an appeal under Section 47 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990?
- Can the jurisdiction of a court be ousted by implication rather than express words?
- Does the power to grant final relief inherently include the jurisdiction to grant interim relief?
- Section 46 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990
- Section 47 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990
- Article 199(4-A) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan
ORDER
1. ' TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J.---Leave to appeal is sought against the order, dated 8-4-2002, of the Lahore High Court Lahore, whereby while admitting the appeal, the learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court passed an interim order suspending the operation of the impugned decree.
2. Facts briefly stated for the disposal of this petition are that the respondent filed an appeal .Against the order of the Additional Collector of Sales Tax, dated 22-12-1999, whereby respondent was directed to pay principal amount of Sales Tax amounting to Rs.9,099,000 with additional tax, as well as penalty. The respondent filed an appeal before the Custom, Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as Tribunal) under section 46 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Darned Tribunal vide its judgment, dated 23-11-2001, upheld the recovery of principal sales tax as well as additional tax. However, the penalty imposed by Collector was remitted and the appeal was disposed of with this modification.
3. ' The respondent filed an appeal under section 47 of the Act before the learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court, wherein as an interim measure the aforesaid order of recovery has been suspended through order, dated 18-4-2002. Hence this petition for leave to appeal.
4. ' Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the learned Judges of the Lahore High Court have got no jurisdiction to grant interim relief under section 47 of the Act as the same has not been provided specifically. It is further argued that it is a revenue matter and its recovery shall not be stayed as a matter of course, without determining the prima facie nature of the case, irreparable loss and balance of convenience favouring the claimant. Learned counsel for the respondent has supported the impugned order.
5. ' We have considered the contentions of the learned counsel and have gone through the documents appended with this petition. Section 47 of the Act has provided an appeal to the High Court in respect of a question of law arising out of the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal under section 46 thereof. It would be appropriate to reproduce subsection (6) of section 47 of the Act which is in the following terms: "(6) Notwithstanding that an appeal has been made to the High Court, the tax shall be payable in accordance with the order under section 46."
6. The aforesaid provision has provided that tax would be payable in accordance with subsection (4) of section 46 of the Act. The Tribunal under this section is also authorised to pass any order after giving opportunity of hearing. However, an embargo has been placed stating that an interim order qua the recovery of tax shall cease to have effect after the expiration of period of six months. This provision is in line with Article 199(4-A) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Ouster of jurisdiction is always through express words which can never be implied. Here in this case under section 47 of the Act, the High Court is not debarred from issuing an interim order. It is an established principle of law that whatever is not prohibited, it is permitted unless is specifically violates any law or rules. As already stated under section 47, the High Court has not been debarred from making any interim order. On the contrary the appellate jurisdiction of the High Court in question of recovery has been tagged with section 46 of the Act. The Tribunal has got power to pass an interim order. In this background, it would not be apt to hold that the Legislature has authorised the Tribunal to grant interim relief, but the same is not available with the High Court which is an apellate forum. There is another established principle of law which cannot be lightly brushed aside that where a Court is competent to allow final relief, it has also got the jurisdiction to allow interim relief. Further it is an interim arrangement and the main appeal would be listed soon as reflected from the impugned order itself, wherein a direction has been made for the fixation of this appeal after three weeks. Resultantly taking into consideration all the aforestated features of the case, this petition is dismissed and leave is refused.
Cited by 15 cases
- Mst. Kiran Saba vs Judge Family Court etc 2024 LHC 4834
- Irfan Saleem & others vs Returning Officer & others 2024 PHC 122
- Wi-Tribe (Pvt.) Ltd. through Head of Legal and Regulatory Affairs vs Pakistan Telecommunication Authority through Chairman 2024 CLC 937
- Uzair Azmat vs Judge Family Court etc 2022 LHC 6005, 2022 [M] CLR 1635
- Prof. Dr. Qazi Tahir Uddin vs The Secretary, Pakistan Medical Commission, Islamabad and 3 others 2022 PLC (C.S.) 805
- M/s Metro Guards (Pvt) Ltd vs Commissioner Inland Revenue (Range-II), 2021 ATIR 29
- Syed Mohammad Hassan Raza Rizvi and others vs Federation of Pakistan 2021 IHC 264, 2022 MLD 227
- Prof. Dr. Asad Aslam Khan vs Government of Punjab & others 2021 PLC (C.S.) 304, 2020 LHC 2407
- M/s OK Gas (Pvt) Ltd. Office # 401, 4th Floor, 55-B, ISE Tower, Jinnah Avenue 2020 6
- Messrs BASHIR PIPE INDUSTRIES (PVT.) LTD vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and another 2019 PCTLR 861, 2019 PTD 980
- Munir Hussain Bhatti And Another vs Federation Of Pakistan And Another K.L.R. 2011 Supreme Court 112
- MUNIR HUSSAIN BHATTI Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN 2011 PLD 407
- BAQIR HAMEED and another vs GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB through Secretary 2019 PLJ Lahore 132
- Prof. Dr. Qazi Tahir Uddin vs The Secretary, Pakistan Medical Commission 2022 [M] CLR 337
- Shamim Ahmed & another vs The Federation of Pakistan & others. 2024 SHC 88, 2024 PTD 738