Learned counsel for the parties agree that the issues raised in this appeal already stand resolved and decided by a judgment of this Court in re Messrs Kamalia Sugar Mills Ltd., Kamalia v.
Superintendent, Intelligence and Investigation (Customs and Central Excise), Regional Office, Lahore and another, reported as 2002 PTD 632.
2. Following are the operative paras. Of that judgment recorded by a Division Bench of this Court to which one of us (Nasim Sikandar, J.) was a party.
"In view of our findings hereinbefore, we partially accept these appeals and hold that the Tribunal was not vested with any jurisdiction to hold that S.R.O. No. 207(1)/98 as amended vide S.R.O. No. 751(1)/2000 is ultra vires and to that extent the judgment of the Tribunal is set aside. The appeal by the Revenue is accordingly accepted.
We further hold that the S.R.O. 751(1)/2000 was merely an amending S.R.O. Which brought about an amendment in the original S.R.O. No. 207(1)/98 it being beneficial in nature could be retrospective as well to that extent. Thirdly we hold that the benefit of fixation of value under S.R.O. No. 207(1)/98 was only confined to the sales tax as contemplated under section 3(1) and it was not available in case of further tax which was chargeable under section 3(1-A)."
3. For the various reasons earlier recorded in the said judgment this appeal by the taxpayer/registered person shall be allowed partially in the above terms.