' After hearing the learned counsel for the parties we are inclined to grant to the petitioner to consider the following questions:--
(1) Whether the constitutional petition was maintainable before the High Court in relation to the contractual obligations surfacing themselves after the purchase order dated 21-7-1996 between the petitioner and respondent No,1?.
(2) Whether the High Court was competent to accept a part of the contract between the petitioner and respondent No,1 as binding and another part as not so binding by observing that the clause relating to the payment of sales tax is ultra vires, particularly when such observation, prima facie, runs counter to the observations made by this Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax, Peshawar Zone, Peshawar v. Messrs Siemen A.G., (1991 PTD 488), to the effect that "nature of a contract intended by the parties thereto could not be changed, under the pretext that the rule of interpretation of a fiscal law in this behalf is different"?
(3) Whether the rights of party, other than the Company/Mills/Juristic person, can be put at naught on the strength of lifting the veil of incorporation, moreso, when the internal management of Company/Mills/Juristic person cannot be treated in law as running contrary to the acceptance of proper representation by them without even so much as the said third party having any mala fides in that regard?
2. Interim order, dated 15-7-1998, is confirmed and shall continue till the disposal of the appeal subject to the modification that rate of sales tax at 18% mentioned therein shall be applicable for the period for which the same is payable under the law at the said rate and from time to time such rate of sales tax shall be applicable as may be provided by the law.
Leave to .