DESIGN: ESSA MALIK
A two-member bench, comprising justices Amir Hani Muslim and Ejaz Afzal Khan, raised the point during the hearing of a petition assailing the order of the Sindh High Court, which had nullified excessive advertisement tax levied by the Karachi Cantonment Board on private outdoor advertising agencies.
On December 13, 2012, a division bench of the high court had allowed a petition filed by four outdoor advertising agencies against imposition of advertisement tax by the cantonment board in violation of the mandatory legal provisions.
The agencies claimed that the Karachi Cantonment Board had imposed enhanced tax without fulfilling legal formalities on signboards and hoardings installed by them within its territorial jurisdictions. They contended that the board could only impose tax with previous sanctions of the federal government, which must be published in the official gazette and it should have taken effect from the day of its publication. “None of these mandatory conditions were met,” noted the high court bench.
Challenging the high court’s decision, the board’s lawyer argued that his client had levied a fee, not tax. In a letter on the imposition of levy, the word ‘tax’ was inadvertently mentioned in lieu of ‘fee’.
He maintained that the high court failed to appreciate the facts on record, and passed the judgment, allowing the petition against the cantonment board.
The apex court judges, however, noted that the board had allowed installation of commercial signboards and hoardings even on the footpaths in the city. They questioned whether there were legal provisions that permitted erecting the advertisement boards on the footpaths.
Adjourning hearing till March 7, the bench directed the cantonment board’s lawyer to produce relevant laws and submit details.
Published in The Express Tribune, March 5th, 2013.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ