LAHORE, Aug 17: The Lahore High Court on Friday issued notices to the Central Board of Revenue (CBR) and the Federal Finance Ministry on a petition by former prime minister Nawaz Sharif’s relatives against the levy of duty on their sugar mills.

The Brothers Sugar Mills, through its counsel Ijaz Aiwan, told court that on June 6, 2007, the finance ministry had issued a notification whereby special excise duty was levied illegally in exercise of powers claimed to have been conferred by Section 3-A of the Federal Excise Act, 2005.

The lawyer said the Section 3-A was not part of the act at the time and date when the notification (SRO 655(1)/2007) was issued.

The lawyer said on July 1, 2007, a bill to give effect to the financial proposal of the federal government and to amend and enact certain laws was passed by the National Assembly.

He said the Section 3-A, titled special excise duty, was incorporated in the Federal Excise Act, 2005, after the assembly dispensed with its business and enacted the Finance Act, 2007.

The lawyer said Section 1 of the Finance Act, 2007, which gave rise to the amendment (Section 3-A) in the Federal Excise Act, states that it shall unless otherwise provided, come into force on July 1, 2007.

He said the levy and enactment of Section 3-A established that these were absolutely prospective in nature because of the absence of any specific mention of words and phrases giving it any retrospective effect.

His clients, the counsel said, were in the dark because the special excise duty was silent with respect to the duty payment on the goods already produced, manufactured and imported prior to the said levy.

The lawyer said the levy amounted to double taxation because the goods of the petitioner were already subjected to the payment of sales tax, and double taxation was a violation of the norms and principles of law.

He prayed to the court to declare illegal and set aside the notification and if the duty was considered payable the respondent be ordered not to collect it on the sale of the sugar produced prior to the insertion of Section 3-A on July 1, 2007.

NOTICE ISSUED: The Supreme Court on Friday issued a notice to the wife of a man whose lawyer termed “harsh and excessive” the maintenance allowance fixed by the arbitration council.

Muhammad Salim, who is living in Dubai, through his counsel Rana Liaquat Ali Khan moved the apex court, stating that the council ordered him to start paying Rs20,000 per month to his wife Fahmida Khanum.

He said the council also ordered him to make payment for the past nine years as well on account of the maintenance allowance, which was unjustified.

Dissatisfied with the order, the lawyer said his client moved the district officer (revenue), who reduced the length of the payment period from nine to six years and fixed the allowance at Rs10,000 per month.

The lawyer said not only the sum of allowance was excessive but also the period for which his client had been ordered to make payment.

He said under the Muslim Family Law Ordinance 1961, his client could only be ordered to pay the maintenance from the past three years.

The lawyer said separation had taken place between his client and his wife because of a dispute between their parents over property.

He said Salim’s mother had filed a suit against Fahmida’s father, brother of his client’s mother, which was pending adjudication.