| Citation(s) |
| 1973 SLG 176 1973 SLD 176 = 1973 SCMR 525 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeals Nos. 64, 65 and 66 of 1960, decision dated:7th February 1961.(On appeal from the judgment and order ofthe High Court of West Pakistan. Lahore, dated the 13thNovember 1957, in Civil Reference No. 2 of 1951)
A. R. CORNELIUS, C.J., S. A. RAHMAN, FAZLEAKBAR AND HAMOODUR RAHMAN, JJ
Muhammad Iqbal, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Muhammad Akram, Attorney for Appellant. Abdul Haque, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by M. Z. Khalil, Attorney for
Respondent
THE LAHORESUKHEKI TRANSPORT SOCIETY, SHEIKHUPURA
VS
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNJAB AND N.W. F. P., LAHORE
Law: Excess Profits Tax Act, (XV of 1940)
Section: 4 & 5
Law: Income Tax Act, 1922
Section: 4(3)
Excess Profits Tax Act (XV of 1940), Ss. 4 & 5 read with Income-tax Act (XI of 1922), S. 4(3)-Maxim : expressio unius est exclusio alterius (mention of one is exclusion of another)-Express mention of exemption from payment of excess profits tax in S. 4 of Act XV of 1940 in respect of profits exempted from income-tax-Gives clear indication of Legislature's intent not to allow any other kind of exemption from payment of excess profits tax.JUDGMENT CORNELIUS, C. J.-These three certificated appeals by the Lahore-Sukheki Transport Society of Sheikhupura, which is registered as a Co-operative Society raise a common question, namely, as to the immunity of profits made by the Society to taxation under the Excess Profits Tax Act, 1940. There is an exemption granted by notification of the Central Government under section 60 of the income-tax Act 1922 in favour of such profits, and it is mainly on the basis of this exemption that the Society attempted to resist successive assessments to tax under the Excess Profits Tax Act. In each case, the matter was taken up before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, thereafter before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and following the rejection of the plea of immunity by both these authorities a reference was obtained to the High Court, where also the Society was unsuccess�ful. It was, however granted a certificate to enable it to appeal to this Court. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner based his rejection of the plea upon the single fact of the absence of express exemption by or under the Excess Profits Tax Act. He declined to consider the argument that excess profits tax was a modified form of income-tax and therefore "in accordance with the spirit of the law exemption from income-tax must be held to cover excess profits tax also". The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal came to the conclusion that there was "no doubt that the profits of the appellant Society are ordinarily chargeable to income-tax by virtue of the provisions contained in section 4 (1) of the Act" and that the express exemption by notification under section 60 "does not affect the applicability of section 4 (1) to the profits of such business". They…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register