Entry-151 of Sixth Schedule to STA: SC CB grants status quo, restores amendment
ISLAMABAD: The Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court granting status quo, restored and maintained the amendment made by Parliament in Entry No 151 of the Sixth Schedule to the Sales Tax Act, 1990.
A five-judge Constitutional Bench, headed by Justice Aminud Din Khan on Wednesday heard the case related to exemption of tax to the residents of FATA/ PATA in form of Entry No 151 of the 6th Schedule to the Sales Tax Act, 1990 through Finance Act, 2024.
The bench accepting the preliminary arguments issued notices to the respondents, and directed the SC Office to club all the related cases, and granted status quo. As a result, the amendment introduced by Parliament in Entry No 151 of the Sixth Schedule to the Sales Tax Act, 1990 remains valid and operative.
Govt will not propose extension in tax exemptions for ex-FATA, PATA: Aurangzeb
Hafiz Ahsaan Ahmad Khokhar, representing the Pakistan Ghee Mills Association and Pakistan Steel Mills Association, contended that Parliament had full constitutional competence to legislate and amend the Sales Tax Act, 1990, including the insertion of Entry No 151 through the Finance Act, 2024. The said provision regulated the customs clearance process for consignments, mandating submission of a pay order with the customs department.
He submitted that a Division Bench of the Peshawar High Court (PHC) judgment dated 31-10-24 not only struck down the legislative amendment but, in a controversial move substituted the term 'pay order' with 'post-dated cheque.' Hafiz Ahsaan argued that this amounted to judicial legislation and was in clear violation of the constitutional separation of powers. 'The High Court assumed the role of Parliament, which is impermissible under the Constitution,' he asserted.
He contended that the High Court had exercised suo motu jurisdiction in violation of the 26th Constitutional Amendment, which expressly restricts such powers. He also emphasised that courts are not empowered to make policy decisions or legislate for convenience, warning that the impugned judgment reflected clear judicial overreach.
Highlighting the legislative intent behind the amendment, Hafiz Ahsaan maintained that Entry No 151 was inserted to protect state revenue and ensure a streamlined taxation process, which had been entirely overlooked by the High Court.
He requested the Court to set aside the impugned judgment on grounds of erroneous legal presumption and constitutional transgression, and to grant interim relief by suspending the High Court's decision. After hearing the preliminary arguments, the bench issued notices, and ordered that all connected matters to be consolidated, and granted status quo.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
2 hours ago
- Express Tribune
JCP to review tenure of CB
A crucial meeting of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP), chaired by Chief Justice Yahya Afridi, will be held on June 19 in the Supreme Court building. The meeting will discuss extending the tenure of constitutional benches. The matter was last addressed in the commission's session on December 21, 2024, where a majority approved a six-month extension for the nominated judges of the Supreme Court's constitutional benches. At present, 15 judges have been working for the constitutional benches. Among them, a committee led by Justice Aminuddin Khan and comprising Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail and Justice Ali Mazahar selects judges for the particular constitutional benches. Performance of CB The present CB led by Justice Aminuddin Khan has been able to issue only three reported judgement since it's creation through 26th constitutional amendment. The CB had issued first reported judgement in January. This two-page decision was related to the jurisdiction of CB itself. The order had held that regular benches could not hear matters related to the interpretation of law and constitution. Secondly, reported short order has been passed in military courts case. Likewise, another reported judgement was authored by Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail. Lawyers are wondering as who will judge the performance of the constitutional bench. They are also raising question that why Justice Mandokhail is not being given independent CB. A lawyer says that the CB started by spending two months studiously avoiding the 26th Amendment case in favour of hearing cases of no importance which had already become infructuous. "It followed that by spending four months almost exclusively on the military courts case before passing a verdict which must surely have pleased the establishment. The only other order of note it passed in that period was to ensure that no regular bench of the Supreme Court could hear any case of importance. "Next, it took up the reserved seats review case in which most of the original judges were excluded and the few who were included seemed to have suddenly, and inexplicably, become of the opposite view from day one", says the lawyer. He said that when the idea of a CB elected by politicians was first floated; many said such a bench was fundamentally against the idea of judicial independence and predicted it would reduce the credibility of the SC to nothing. Nonetheless, judges in Pakistan have sometimes defied predictions. "Unfortunately, the CB's performance thus far has proved this is not one of those times." He also said that the stated rationale of the CB at the time of the 26th Amendment was to improve the constitutional jurisprudence of the SC. In its first six months, the number of detailed judgments it has issued can be counted on the fingers of one hand. And all of them have tended to take out jurisprudence backwards and closer to the desires of the establishment," he adds.
Express Tribune
6 hours ago
- Express Tribune
JCP to review tenure of constitutional benches
A crucial meeting of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP), chaired by Chief Justice Yahya Afridi, will be held on June 19 in the Supreme Court building. The meeting will discuss extending the tenure of constitutional benches. The matter was last addressed in the commission's session on December 21, 2024, where a majority approved a six-month extension for the nominated judges of the Supreme Court's constitutional benches. At present, 15 judges have been working for the constitutional benches. Among them, a committee led by Justice Aminuddin Khan and comprising Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail and Justice Muhammad Ali Mazahar selects judges for the particular constitutional benches. Extension of constitutional benches has been proposed for the second time. The federal government on December 21 managed to get its way at the JCP which had rejected a suggestion to nominate all Supreme Court judges to its Constitutional Bench (CB) by a majority vote of 7 to 6. Except Justice Aminuddin, all JCP's judicial members namely CJP Yahya Afridi, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail had voted for all the Supreme Court judges to be part of the CB. Two PTI members Barrister Gahar Ali Khan and Barrister Ali Zafar supported their view. However, the government as well as the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) representatives in JCP did not support their suggestion. The judicial members had faced embarrassment, when their own fellow judge, Justice Aminuddin Khan, did not support their suggestion. The JCP by majority 7 to 6 endorsed the extension of the CB led by Justice Aminuddin Khan for six months. Once again it is being expected that the government will be successful to get majority votes for the extension of present CB, which performance is under question. There is no objective criteria for the selection of judges for CB. Performance of CB The present CB led by Justice Aminuddin Khan has been able to issue only three reported judgement since it's creation through 26th constitutional amendment. The CB had issued first reported judgement in January. This two-page decision was related to the jurisdiction of CB itself. The order had held that regular benches could not hear matters related to the interpretation of law and constitution. Secondly, reported short order has been passed in military courts case. Likewise, another reported judgement was authored by Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail. Lawyers are wondering as who will judge the performance of the constitutional bench. They are also raising question that why Justice Mandokhail is not being given independent CB. A lawyer says that the CB started by spending two months studiously avoiding the 26th Amendment case in favour of hearing cases of no importance which had already become infructuous. "It followed that by spending four months almost exclusively on the military courts case before passing a verdict which must surely have pleased the establishment. The only other order of note it passed in that period was to ensure that no regular bench of the Supreme Court could hear any case of importance. "Next, it took up the reserved seats review case in which most of the original judges were excluded and the few who were included seemed to have suddenly, and inexplicably, become of the opposite view from day one", says the lawyer. He said that when the idea of a CB elected by politicians was first floated; many said such a bench was fundamentally against the idea of judicial independence and predicted it would reduce the credibility of the SC to nothing. Nonetheless, judges in Pakistan have sometimes defied predictions. 'Unfortunately, the CB's performance thus far has proved this is not one of those times.' He also said that the stated rationale of the CB at the time of the 26th Amendment was to improve the constitutional jurisprudence of the SC. In its first six months, the number of detailed judgments it has issued can be counted on the fingers of one hand. And all of them have tended to take out jurisprudence backwards and closer to the desires of the establishment,' he adds.
Business Recorder
a day ago
- Business Recorder
Corporate tax rate issue: OICCI disappointed over limited govt progress
KARACHI: The Overseas Investors Chamber of Commerce and Industry (OICCI) has expressed disappointment over the government's limited progress in addressing inequitable corporate tax rate in the recent budget. It said while the marginal reduction in Super Tax rates is acknowledged, OICCI reiterates the urgent need for a comprehensive overhaul of tax structures to enhance Pakistan's competitiveness and attract foreign investment. The Chamber also notes the absence of meaningful reductions in government expenditure, which could have helped narrow the budget deficit. Fiscal discipline remains critical to ensuring macroeconomic stability, and OICCI urges the government to prioritize expenditure rationalisation in its budgetary measures. OICCI regrets the government's missed opportunity to broaden the tax base in the current budget, particularly the absence of any concrete strategy to document Pakistan's substantial Rs. 9 trillion cash-based informal economy - a critical measure for meaningful revenue enhancement and economic formalization that the Chamber has consistently advocated for OICCI welcomes several positive reforms, including simplified tax returns for salaried individuals and small businesses, the nationwide rollout of e-invoicing, and the expansion of POS systems, all measures long advocated by the Chamber. However, their success hinges on effective implementation, and OICCI stresses the need for transparency and consistency in execution. The increase in the tax exemption threshold for salaried individuals (from Rs. 0.6 million to Rs. 1.2 million) and the reduction in their tax rate (from 5 percent to 1 percent) are commendable steps that align with OICCI's recommendations but still fall short of providing impactful and necessary relief to reduce ongoing brain drain in the country. OICCI also acknowledges the government's gradual phasing out of tax exemption on FATA and PATA and the government's stricter measures against non-compliant taxpayers, including restrictions on property and vehicle purchases, asset transfers abroad, and enhanced penalties. Such actions are crucial for improving tax compliance and broadening the revenue base. Despite these advancements, the budget falls short of introducing transformative policies for the corporate sector. OICCI emphasises that gradually rationalising tax slabs and reducing the overall tax burden on businesses are essential to promoting a more investment-friendly environment. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
