Case Details

Citation(s)
2016 SLG 1347 2016 SLD 1347 2016 PTD 2831 (2017) 116 TAX 103
Sindh High Court
I.T.R.A. No. 209 of 2012, decided on 8th August, 2016.
AQEEL AHMED ABBASI, JUSTICE AND ABDUL MALIK GADDI, JUSTICE
Amin-ud-Din Ansari for Applicant. Amjad Javed Hashmi for
Respondents.

MOTIWALA SECURITIES (PVT.) LTD. through Chief Executive/MD

VS

COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE

Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

Section: 122(5A),131,168,170,233A(1)(a),233(1)(b) ,233A(1)(c),133,DivisionIIA ofPartIV ofFirst Schedule

Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001)- -Ss.168, 170, 233-A(1)(c) & 133-Reference-Refund, issuance of- Applicant was a stock broker who claimed to be entitled for issuance of refund collected by Stock Exchange-Validity-Amount of tax collected and withheld relating to customer/client of applicant was the liability of such taxpayer and not the liability of applicant-Mere fact that amount of tax was collected or withheld by Stock Exchange on the entire transaction made by applicant would not in any manner change the scope of liability or chargeability of tax-Applicant was not required to make payment of such refund of tax to its customers under any agreement between the two-Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, was a special law and a separate piece of legislation which had catered to chargeability of income and collection of tax liability of a taxpayer- Any agreement or accounting procedure, if any, adopted by applicant company, could not circumvent legal course as provided under Income Tax Ordinance, 2001-High Court declined to interfere in the orders passed by authorities below as well as the order of Appellate Tribunal, which depicted correct legal position-Circular issued by Federal Board of Revenue in such regard did not suffer from any illegality, though it could have binding effect in quasi- judicial proceedings or upon High Court while deciding a legal question-High Court decided the question in negative-Reference was dismissed in circumstances. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: AQEEL AHMED ABBASI, JUSTICE:--------------- Through instant Income Tax Reference Application, the applicant has proposed five questions, however, dropped questions Nos. 1 and 5 and decided to press only questions Nos. 2 to 4, which have been mentioned in order dated 07.12.2012, which read as follows:- 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the applicant/tax payer company in terms of [section] 233A(1)(c) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, is a prescribed person/tax collecting agency under Income Tax Ordinance, 2001? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the Case under section 233A(l)(c) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 Karachi Stock Exchange collected tax during the year from the…
🔒
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