According to the LHC order, it is stated that the respondents (Federation) issued notification/SRO No 5 84(1)/2017 dated 01.07.2017, whereby amendments were made in SRO No 1125(1)/2011 to nullify the ratio of judgment rendered by this court in writ petition No 35733 of 2016 titled UNI Dyeing (Pvt) Limited vs Federation of Pakistan etc. It is furthermore stated that the amendment made through SRO No 584(I)/2017 dated 01.07.2017 made the levy of further tax under section 3(1A) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 applicable to goods supplied to a person having no sales tax registration number. It is submitted that tax through notification could not be levied when this court had already held to the contrary in its aforementioned judgment. Points raised need consideration.
The LHC said that since vires of law have been challenged, let notice be issued to the attorney general of Pakistan in terms of Order XXVII-A CPC. At this juncture, Deputy Attorney General for Pakistan, Imran Aziz Khan accepted notice on behalf of attorney general of Pakistan and sought sometime to prepare his brief.
The dispensation sought for production of certified copies of the documents is allowed subject to all just and legal exceptions. Till the next date of hearing, the operation of clause (C)(III) of SRO No 584(I)/2017 dated 01.07.2017 shall remain suspended, the LHC order added.
It is prayed that during the pendency of the instant petition, the provisions of clause (C) (iii) of impugned SRO 584(1)/2017 dated 01.07.20''17 may be suspended and the respondents be restrained to proceed further in the matter in any manner whatsoever. The petitioner said during the pendency of the instant petition, the provisions of clause (C) (iii) of impugned SRO 584(1)/2017 may be suspended and the respondents be restrained to proceed further in the matter in any manner whatsoever.
The petition was filed through petitioners of the corporate and non-corporate entities which being fully conversant with the facts of the case are in a position to depose thereto. A tax expert has informed that similar controversy was under litigation last year as well and the LHC had passed judgment in favour of industries. This time though the government has made the law applicable after due diligence and legal amendments lacking last year as pointed out by the court, the issue has again cropped up and gone into fresh litigation, he concluded.