Federal excise duty, payment of

Citation Name : 2019 SCMR 282 SUPREME-COURT
Side Appellant : PAKISTAN TELEVISION CORPORATION LIMITED
Side Opponent : COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE (LEGAL) LTU, ISLAMABAD
Ss. 2(23), 3 & First Sched., Table II---Customs Act (IV of 1969), First Sched. [Pakistan Customs Tariff (PCT), Heading 98.12]---Wireless Telegraphy Act (XVII of 1933), S. 3---Television Receiving Apparatus (Possession and Licensing) Rules, 1970, Rr. 2(e) & 3(3)---TV license fee recovered by Pakistan Television Corporation Ltd. (PTV)---Federal excise duty, payment of---Exemption---Telecasts, TV sets and TV license fee were not covered by the definition of "services" in S. 2(23) of the Federal Excise Act, 2005 and Item 6 of Table II of the First Schedule to the said Act read with Chapter 98 of the Pakistan Customs Tariff (PCT)---TV license fee, telecasts and TV sets not being covered by any of the subheadings of PCT Heading 98.12 were not subject to Federal Excise Duty on a reasonable interpretation of the law---Pakistan Television Corporation Ltd. (PTV) was exempt from payment of Federal Excise Duty on TV license fee---Moreover the Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1933 and the Television Receiving Apparatus (Possession and Licensing) Rules, 1970, made the Parliamentary intention clear, i.e. the license fee was paid not for any service provided by PTV but by the holder of the TV set for its possession---TAX able event was not the provision of any service by PTV; it was the possession of a television set by the holder---TV license fee not being the product of any service provided by PTV, Federal Excise Duty could not be levied on it---Appeal was allowed accordingly.

Citation Name : 2019 SCMR 282 SUPREME-COURT
Side Appellant : PAKISTAN TELEVISION CORPORATION LIMITED
Side Opponent : COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE (LEGAL) LTU, ISLAMABAD
Fiscal/TAX ation statute---Charging provision---Scope---Provision providing for a mode of collection was not a charging provision; it could neither abridge nor expand the scope of a charging provision in an Act.

Citation Name : 2019 SCMR 235 SUPREME-COURT
Side Appellant : OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS
Side Opponent : COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANIES ZONE-I, KARACHI
Fiscal statute---Exemption clause---Application and interpretation---Firstly, onus laid on the TAX payer to show that his case came within the exemption; secondly, if two reasonable interpretations were possible the one against the TAX payer would be adopted; thirdly, if the TAX payer's case came fairly within the scope of the exemption then he could not be denied the benefit of the same on the basis of any supposed intention to the contrary of the legislature or authority granting it.