Case Details

Citation(s)
2013 SLG 81 2013 SLD 81 (2013) 107 TAX 278 2013 PTD 1598 2013 PTCL 322
Islamabad High Court
I.C.A. No. 552/2013, decision dated: 28-03-2013
MR. CHIEF, JUSTICE MUHAMMAD ANWAR KHAN KASI & MR., JUSTICE SHAUKAT AZIZ SIDDIQUI
Ahmed Bashir and Kazim Jan for Appellant. None for
Respondents

WARID TELECOM

VS

COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE and others

Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

Section: 120,177

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 199

Law: Finance Act, 2010

Section: 214(c)

(a) Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001)---Ss. 120, 177 [as amended by Finance Act (XVI of 2010)] & 214(c)---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Self-assessment finalized under S. 120 of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001---Notice under S.177(1) of Ordinance, 2001 issued to assessee requiring him to produce record/documents pertaining to such assessment for conducting tax audit by Commissioner---Assessee's plea was that self-assessment once finalized ' could not be reopened---Validity---Commissioner under 5.177 of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 had power to conduct tax audit to verify assessment---Object of S. 177 of the Ordinance was not to frustrate self-assessment scheme---Section 214(c) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 empowered Board with a view to have a check upon subordinate authorities to confirm that assessment were properly made---Section 177 of the Ordinance was not violative of provisions of the Constitution---Constitutional petition was dismissed in circumstances. (b) Interpretation of statutes--- ----Fiscal statute---Procedural provisions would be construed in a manner to advance object behind thereof. ORDER MUHAMMAD ANWAR KHAN KASI, C.J.---This I.C.A. challenges the judgment dated 12-3-2013 passed by learned Single Judge in Chambers by holding that section 177 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 is not violative of any Article of the Constitution and cannot be treated as discriminatory, while section 214(c) of the Income Tax Ordinance is an independent section and is not subsequent to section 177. 2. It is inter alia contended that the learned Single Judge has failed to appreciate law and facts of the case, and misread the documentary evidence. 3. It is next submitted that the appellant had filed the complete Income Tax Return for the Tax year, 2009 on 5-1-2010, which was accepted and finalized under section 120 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 and, therefore, the impugned notice dated 8-10-2010 issued by respondent No. 1 under section 177(1) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 to furnish records/documents for the period relating to Tax year 2009…
🔒
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