MUHAMMAD ASLAM, TECHNICAL MEMBER.-- (1). This appeal has been filed by M/S Speciality Printers (Pvt) Limited, Karachi against order-in-appeal No. 716/97 dated 16.9.1997 passed by the learned Collector Appeals, Karachi.
2. Facts leading to this appeal are that:-
(i) The appellants filed a supplementary duty drawback claim bearing ID No. 03139 dated 14.11.1996 against Bill of Export No. 004400 dated 26.8.1996 under SRO No. 686(I)/96 dated 19.8.1996 for the refund of sales tax amounting to Rs. 3,391.
(ii) The Sales Tax Certificate produced in support thereof revealed that the appellants were operating under the Fixed Tax Scheme which had been launched by the Government under the provisions of Section 3(4) of the Sales Tax Act,- 1990 as against the normal system envisaged in section 3(1) ibid.
(iii) As this scheme debarred the tax-payers to claim any rebate, remission, refund, adjustment or drawback of sales tax under the provisions of section 4, 7, 9 and 10 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 or the rules made under the said Act, the appellants were served with a Show-Cause Notice on 30.1.1997 to explain as to why their refund claim of sales tax may not be rejected,.
(iv) The appellants contested the contents of the Show- Cause Notice and argued that their claims could not be rejected as they had not asked for the refund of the out-put tax paid by them under sub-section (4) of Section 3 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 but of the input tax which was independently refundable to them under notifications No. SRO 470(I)/90 dated 27.5.1990 and 686(I)/96 dated 19.8.1996 read with Section 10(2) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990.
(v) After discussing the rationale of the levy of the fixed tax scheme and various governing notifications, the learned Deputy Collector rejected the claims which pertained to the period commencing from 1st July, 1994.
(vi) The appellants preferred an appeal before the learned Collector (Appeals) who too found their stand un-tenable and, therefore, up-held the orders already passed in the matter.
3. The appellants still maintain that the fixed tax scheme debarred adjustment of output tax only and not the one which was paid at the import stage. Their thrust is that this tax which is paid at the import stage can independently be re-claimed after export of the goods under the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 10 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 and that it has nothing to do with a situation which is envisaged in terms of section 3(4) ibid.
4. The learned Departmental Representative has submitted that as there is no lacuna in the orders passed by the lower Forums, the same be confirmed as such and the appeal rejected.
5. As the fixed tax scheme envisaged under Section 3(4) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 was in lieu of levying and collecting the tax under sub-section (1) of Section 3 ibid, the manufacturers had no option but to opt for either of the two. As the appellants switched over to the fixed tax system, they obviously were debarred from claiming any rebate, remission, refund, adjustment or draw-back of sales tax under the provisions of section 4, 7, 9 and 10 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 and/or the rules made under the said Act. As this was a conscious decision of the Government and hardly any ambiguity or confusion was left on this account while issuing the notifications, there remains no ground for agitation in this behalf. The scheme as such, the governing notifications and the ones specifically issued for the appellants, namely SRO 470(I)/95 dated 19.8.1996 have all been beautifully discussed and thrashed out by the learned Deputy Collector in his Order-in-Original No. 3/97 dated 29.3.1997. We fully endorse his views and confirm that in a situation like this, one is not entitled to reap the benefit of refund, rebate, adjustment etc. along with payment of tax on fixed basis.
6. In view of the aforesaid, as the orders already passed are correct in law and on facts, the same are confirmed and the appeal rejected being devoid of any merit, substance or legal force. It should be 886(I)(96)