Case Details

Citation(s)
2013 SLG 85 2013 SLD 85 2013 PTCL 298 2013 PTD 1620 (2013) 108 TAX 53
Islamabad High Court
W.P. No. 139/2012, announced on 12-03-2013, hearing DATE :23rd January, 2013
MR., JUSTICE RIAZ AHMAD KHAN
Sirdar Ahmed Jamal Sukhera, Ayyaz Shaukat M. Raheel Kamran Sheikh, Boshir Hussain Accountant (in Writ Petition No. 731 of 2011), Hafiz Muhammad Idrees, in his own petitions as well as on behalf of Ahmed Bashir, Atif Waheed Sh., Shahbaz Butt, Ch. Naeem-ul-

OMV PAKISTAN EXPLORATIONvsCOMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE and others

Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

Section: 177

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 25,199

Law: Finance Act, 2010

Section: 214C

(a) Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001)---Ss. 177 [as amended by Finance Act (XVI of 2010)] & 214C---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 25 & 199---Constitutional petition---Self-assessment case for selection of tax audit---Issuance of notice by Commissioner Inland Revenue to petitioner to provide record/books of accounts pertaining to relevant tax year for conducting tax audit---Petitioner's plea was that power to select case for tax audit vested in Federal Board of Revenue by virtue of S. 214(c) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, thus, Commissioner could not issue such notice without prior selection of his case by Board; and that Ss. 177 & 214(c) of the Ordinance, were violative of Art. 25 of the Constitution---Validity---Word "tax audit" would mean that office conducting audit would have to make reassessment by verifying books, vouchers and record produced by taxpayer---Commissioner under S. 177 of Ordinance as amended by Finance Act, 2010 after going through return filed by assessee, if there was any doubt, before calling for record/documents was bound to give reasons therefor and communicate same to assessee in advance - Intent and object of S. 177 of Ordinance could be adjudged with reference to S.120 thereof---Reverification of deemed assessment would not violate any right of assessee---Commissioner could not exercise his power to select case for audit in discriminatory manner, which if so exercised could be struck down by High Court---Provisions of S. 177 of Ordinance, 2001 neither ambiguous nor discriminatory nor its object being to frustrate self-assessment scheme---Object of S.214(c) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 being to keep an eye/check on tax regime, but not to give power to Federal Board to call for record of any person---Sections 177 & 214(c) of Ordinance were two independent sections and S.214(c) was not subservient to S.177---Principles---High Court dismissed petition. Chenone Stores Ltd. v. The Federal Board of Revenue and others 2012 PTD 1815 ref. Federation of Pakistan and others v. Shaukat Ali Mian and others PLD 1999 SC 1026 rel. (b) Interpretation of statutes--- ----Fiscal statute---Ordinary/natural meaning of words used in…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492