Find a Lawyer

COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX, CENTRAL, ZONE-B, KARACHI versus MESSRS PAKISTAN MACHINE TOOL FACTORY LTD., KARACHI

Sections 7, 14, 15 and 17 (I) of the Sales Tax Act, 1951, section RO 125 (I) / 70, dated 29 6 1970 [amended section RO 540 (I) / 71, dated 23 11 1971]. Exemption was claimed pursuant to Section RO 125 (I) / 70, sales tax on gear boxes and excels is 29 1970 1970 [as amended by Section RO 540 (I) / 1971. (Dated 23 11 1971) The Assessing Officer dismissed such exemption on the basis that certain parts of automotive vehicles do not constitute machinery parts as appellate authority in section RO 125 (I) / 70. The definition of machinery is very broad and covers automotive vehicles Ebionel retained the appellate authority's conclusion that withholding the revenue, the axes and gear boxes were neither machinery in the sense of section RO 125 (I) / 70 nor had any engine parts been made on record. No and in the reference given by the Tribunal to indicate that two such components were used for any industrial process. Exemptions for such machinery or components or sparks were available. Parts of the e-machinery, as described in the self-notification, the appellate authority limited its focus to the definition of machinery, ie machinery. The power of any explanation runs, but it is used in the latter part, such as in an industrial process. The Appeal Authority and the Tribunal were completely disregarded for bringing any machinery into the appreciation given in the notification. And the second condition was that there should be machinery that was used in an industrial process. ask a advocate free from Sahiwal lawyer