JUDGMENT NASIM SIKANDAR, J.~ The appellant is a registered person, In a report by the Audit Wing of the Revenue it was pointed out that an amount of Rs.68,137/- due as further tax for the period of July, 1998 was deposited by the appellant on 7.9.1998 instead of 15.8.1998. Therefore, it was found liable to pay additional tax for the month of July. After issuance of a show-cause notice adjudication proceedings were undertaken which resulted in an Order-in-Original whereby the appellant was required to pay additional tax for late payment of further tax amounting to Rs.68,137/- as noted above.
2. On appeal a Division Bench of the Customs, Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Lahore Bench found in favour of the appellant and set aside the order on ) the ground that there was no justification for levy of additional tax. In the view of the learned Members further tax was levied w.e.f.
1.7.1998 vide Finance Act, 1998 and as soon as the appellant came to know of it the amount of further tax was deposited on 7.9.1998 which involved a nominal delay. Hence this further appeal by the department.
3. Learned Counsel for the respondent-revenue at the outset states that the aforesaid further tax of one percent imposed by Finance Act, 1998 having already been struck down by the Supreme Court of Pakistan on 19.5.2002 in C.P. Nos. 1956-L of 1999 and 149-L of 2000 no question of additional tax could possibly arise at all.
4. We will agree. By way of the aforesaid judgment the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan maintained the judgment of the Peshawar High Court whereby the levy of one percent further tax as levied by the insertion of subsection (1-A) to Section 3 of the Sales Tax Act was struck down.
Subsequently a number of petitions were filed by the manufactures of sugar before the apex Court against dismissal of their Constitutional petitions by a learned Single Judge of this Court recorded on 15.11.1999. Their Lordships of the Supreme Court with reference to their earlier judgment recorded in C.P. No. 474-P of 1999 directed against the judgment of the Peshawar High Court again accepted the petitions to the extent of further tax at the rate of 1% levied by Finance Act, 1998. In para 5 of the judgment their Lordships recorded the fact that the learned counsel appearing for the revenue had not contested that issue, lt was rather noted that further tax at the rate of one percent levied by the Finance Act, 1998. Had ceased to have effect in view of their earlier judgment dated 19.5.2002.
5. That being so we will allow the objection raised by the learned counsel for the respondent- revenue and hold that original levy having been struck down, no question of payment of further tax could arise at all. Therefore, this appeal by the Revenue shall be dismissed.