Section-3 read with Rule-31

Whether the joint-venture firm was not liable to pay any VAT under the Act.

Zero VAT can only be levied on the services rendered by the joint-venture firm under the contract in respect of the foreign currency portion of the contract price.

National Board of Revenue Vs. Hyundai Engineering & Construction Company Ltd. & Ors. 8BLT(AD) 85

VAT Act, 1991 (Act 22 of 1991)

read with its proviso, in our view, does not empower the Commissioner of VAT to authorize his subordinate officers to carry out such inspection or search of loaded vehicles with goods by setting up any check-post at a fixed place on the High Way—In case of any necessity, the Commissioner of VAT is empowered under Rule 7 to issue order authorizing his subordinate officer to carry out inspection, search or seizer of goods in the vehicles specifying the goods or the class of goods mentioning the name of the officer by whom the inspection etc. is to be carried out and the area in which such checking should take place. The authorised officer must carry his identity and show the same when it is so required.

Chittagong Steel Re-Rolling Mills Association Vs. Commissioner of Custom 12 BLT (HCD)214


A Statute, which takes away or impairs any vested right acquired under existing law, is always deemed to be prospective. The general rule being  that without a clear indication from the wordings of a statute, the statute is not to receive retrospective effect.

Govt. of Bangladesh Vs. Apex Weaving & Finishing Mills Ltd. 12 BLT (AD)-77 .