Pakistan Case Law← Search
2020 P C T L R 627, 2019 PTD 1956, PTCL 2020 CL. 139, 2019 SCMR 1124

PAKISTAN STATE OIL CO. LTD., KARACHI vs COLLECTOR CUSTOMS CENTRAL

Citation2020 P C T L R 627, 2019 PTD 1956, PTCL 2020 CL. 139, 2019 SCMR 1124
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Appeals Nos. 911 to 915 of 2009
Date2018-10-18
Judge(s)Umar Ata Bandial, Munib Akhtar, Yahya Afridi
ResultAppeals dismissed

ORDER

UMAR ATA BANDIAL, J.---The learned departmental fora below have decided against the appellant to hold that the clearance of petroleum products shipped from its depot(s) purportedly for export to Afghanistan without payment of duties and taxes was unjustified and unlawful because in fact the said consignments were diverted and sold locally within Pakistan. After issuance of show cause notice dated 29.11.2004 and commencement of recovery proceedings against the appellant, the amount of duties and taxes were deposited with the respondent tax authorities. The learned Tribunal has concluded in para 11 of its order dated 22.10.2007 that the commission of offence of diversion of the consignments to the local market was committed with the knowledge of the appellant thereby establishing the charge of tax fraud against the appellant. Liability to additional tax was therefore imposed in the said circumstances of the case and findings recorded thereon. Payment of the duties and tax dues on the consignments was delayed deliberately .

2. Learned counsel has sought to argue that the imposition of additional tax and additional duty under section 3-B of Central Excise Act, 1944 and section 34 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 was uncalled for. There is, however , a clear factual finding by the learned Tribunal that provides a sound basis, for the imposit ion of such tax. A finding of fact cannot be assailed before this Court. In any event, no question of law relating to the said liability was properly framed before the High Court. Learned counsel sought to rely on one of the questions referred by the Appellant in its Tax Reference filed by it before the learned High Court, however , in our view that question does not squarely assail the said finding nor does it constitu te a question of law on the said finding of fact noted above. Accordingly , no such question can be raised before us.

3. For the foregoing reasons, these appeals are dismissed.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
Disclaimer·Privacy·Terms·Search