Find a Lawyer

COTTON ARTS (PVT.) LTD. versus COLLECTOR SALES TAX, FAISALABAD

Receiving tax on certain items at Articles 2 (47), 7A & 46AV and additional prices did not take into account the fact that the appellant's supplying commission was an agent and was thus registered. ? As a Wholesaler with the Income Tax Department and as a Commission Agent in the Sales Tax Department. And being a commission agent, he didn't need to pay any price increase. And was obliged to supply the goods at the prices set by his principal / manufacturer. The appellant's supplier did not already have to pay the manufacturer / principal to pay such goods, in which case the department Didn't object to it. The computer profile of the registered person was to indicate his status as an operator and the input tax and output tax were equal, which confirmed his status as a commission agent, not by the supplier or the appellant. No allegation of false transaction nor tax fraud was equated in the showcase notice without which the return of input tax paid by the appellant could not be ruled out. The authority was remanded

Related judgments — Inland, 2011

• MUNIR FAZLA v. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/WEALTH TAX (APPEALS) ZONE-II, ISLAMABAD 2011 PTD 1452
• C.I.R., (LEGAL), R.T.O., RAWALPINDI v. WASEEM IQBAL ANSARI 2011 PTD 1455
• AZIZ BROTHERS, RAWALPINDI v. COLLECTOR SALES TAX, RAWALPINDI 2011 PTD 1505
• PAKISTAN TELEVISION CORPORATION LTD. (P.T.V.C.L.), ISLAMABAD v. COLLECTOR (ADJUDICATION), COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, SALES TAX AND CENTRAL EXCISE 2011 PTD 1513
• MYKA STEEL (PVT) LTD. v. COLLECTOR, SALES TAX & FEDERAL EXCISE, PESHAWAR 2011 PTD 1588
• TAJ PROCESSING INDUSTRIES (PVT) LTD. v. C.I.R. (R.T.O.), FAISALABAD 2011 PTD 1625
• NAVEED ENTERPRISES, FAISALABAD v. COLLECTOR SALES TAX AND FEDERAL EXCISE (RTO), FAISALABAD 2011 PTD 1629
• COLLECTOR OF SALES TAX, FAISLABAD v. BASHIR PRINTING INDUS., FAISALABAD 2011 PTD 1645

All Inland judgments of 2011 →

property advocate from Faisalabad lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes