Find a Lawyer

D.G. KHAN CEMENT COMPANY LTD. AND OTHERS versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN AND OTHERS

It is clear that the purposes of Sections 3, 2 (22), (28) and (30) of the Sales Tax Act 1990 are behind the scope of Sections 3, 2 (22), (28) and (30) of the Sales Tax Tax period. Should go into the state exchequer and after that the manufacturer should not retain it. There is no hard and fast rule as to when and at what stage this transaction will be considered a sales transaction. The issue of goods is to be decided according to the facts and circumstances of the case, especially. However, in the present case the use of the manufacturer of a particular type of business or trade, in which the amount of consideration is received. The provisions of Sections 2 (22) and (30) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, for the subsequent cement supply, clearly state that the time of supply is considered as the date on which the advance payment was received. Or supplied whichever is earlier, and in which case, the amount of the pre-paid portion will be considered as the proportionate quantity of cement to be priced on this date and later on instead of the delivery date of the goods. Must be submitted to the public exchequer before the 20th of next month. The date of receipt of the quantities in advance, therefore, the sales date for the purpose of sales tax can be well understood as the manufacturer believed that on the date of supply of cement, what was the goods there Whether the price was variable or the transaction was canceled, the right and interest of the manufacturer should be preserved; there was no such problem in the construction of the relevant provisions for the date of sale of the goods for the purpose of payment. Sales tax property advocate from Okara lawyer