Case Details

Citation(s)
2021 SLG 1310 2021 SLD 1310 2021 PTD 1203 (2021) 124 TAX 153
Islamabad High Court
Tax Reference No. 7 in C.M. No. 01 of 2007, decided on 5thApril, 2021
BABAR SATTAR, JUSTICE ATHAR MINALLAH, CHIEF JUSTICE
Hafiz Muhammad Idrees and Syed Farid Ahmed Bukhari for Applicant.Syed Ishfaq Hussain Naqvi for
Respondent.

MESSRS FEDERAL BANK FOR COOPERATIVES, ISLAMABADVSCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANIES ZONE, ISLAMABAD

Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 1979

Section: 54

(a) Interpretation of statutes””Conflict between law”Contradiction between two special laws or statutory provisions”Principles of construction”Scope”Implied repeal, doctrine of”Applicability”While applying seemingly conflicting provisions of two statutes, court must seek to interpret them in a manner that afforded harmonious construction and prevented emergence of conflict”Assumption was to be made that if Legislature wished to override an existing law, it would do so explicitly and thus doctrine of implied repeal was not to be readily or mechanically invoked”For resolution of conflict between two special laws, one later in time would ordinarily prevail for being an embodiment of latest expression of Legislatures intent, however, such principle was not to be mechanically applied as being aware of an earlier special law, Legislature could override same through explicit language in a subsequent special law if it is so wished”In event that there was contradiction between provisions of two statutes, it was to be presumed that statute within the provision of which the Legislature has included a non-obstante clause was to be given overriding effect over provisions of other statute that it was in conflict with, in order to give effect to expressed Legislative intent”Both statutes, if they contained non- obstante clauses, then special law would prevail over general law, and law later in time would ordinarily prevail in case of conflict between two special laws”However, a non-obstante clause was also not to be given overriding effect in a mechanical fashion as underlying object of interpretive project undertaken by court was to discover meaning of words used by Legislature and a non-obstante clause was usually employed to suggest that a provision referred to in such clause was to prevail over other provisions of a statute, but repugnancy between non- obstante clause and other clauses was not to be presumed and overriding effect was to be accorded only in case of irreconcilable conflict”Harmonious construction, if same could not be accorded to provisions of two special statues without giving tortured meaning to words used; then object, purpose and policy of such statutes…
🔒
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