Find a Lawyer

Sales Tax Appeal No.1137/LB of 2008 decided on 3rd June, 2009.

----S.10---Excess amount to be refunded---Standing Order No.3/2006---Provisional objection---First Appellate Authority found that refund was admissible if the appellant produces documents as laid down in Standing Order and the department was directed to scrutinize the same within thirty days from the date of receipts of such order---Appellant contended that the case was based on the objection of STARR which was required to be further verified manually also and the objections were of provisional nature and not finalized i.e. subject to scrutiny for verification of input tax---Validity---Case should have been progressed under final objection and not on provisional objection---Field formation should avoid issuing show-cause notice on the basis of scrutiny of the invoices for input verification; it should be verified first and after rejection by the department it should be converted into show-cause notice---Case was remanded to the original adjudicating authority after setting aside the order of First Appellate Authority by the Appellate Tribunal with the direction that the case should be decided within one month from the date of receipt of the orders. Khubaib Ahmed for Appellant. Muhammad Khurshid, Auditor for Respondent. Date of hearing. 3rd June, 2009.

This decision disposes of Order-in-Appeal No.1630 of 2008, dated 13-8-2008 passed by the Collector of Customs, Sales Tax and Federal Excise (Appeals), Faisalabad. 2. Relevant facts of the case are that during processing of refund claim filed by the appellant an amount of Rs.193138 was deferred due to certain reasons/discrepancies. Based on the reported facts of the case as show-cause notice was issued to the appellant which culminated in passing of Order-in-Original No.531/2007 dated 21-7-2007. Being aggrieved of the said order the appellant filed appeal before the Collector (Appeals) Faisalabad who vide Order-in-Appeal No.1630/2008 held that refund with regard to issue No.3 is admissible if the appellant produces documents as laid down in Standing Order No.3/2006 and the department was directed to scrutinize the same within thirty days from the date of receipt of said order. Feeling aggrieved of the said order the appellant has come up in appeal before the Tribunal agitating certain grounds praying that the orders of the lower forums may be declared unlawful and of no legal sanctity. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant stated that the case is based on the objection of the .STARR which was required to be further verified manually also and the objections are of provisional nature and not finalized i.e. subject to scrutiny for verification of input tax etc. I failed to understand how the case progressed under provisional objection whereas it should have been issued on .the basis of final objection. The field formation should avoid issuing show-cause notice on the basis of scrutiny of invoices for input verification. It should be verified first and after rejection by the department it should be converted into show-cause notice. Therefore the case is remanded back to the original adjudicating authority after setting aside the order in appeal. The case should be decided within one month from the date of receipt of the orders. 4. This order shall also apply mutates mutandis to the following appeals involving common question of law and facts and even the appellant in all the cases are the same:

C.M.A./179/Tax (Trib.). Order accordingly.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.