| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2021 SLG 2665 2021 SLD 2665 2021 PTD 1986 (2021) 124 TAX 259 2021 SCMR 1819 2024 PTCL 453 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No. 2256-L of 2015 and Civil Petition No.2257-L of 2015 and Civil Petition No. 2283-L of 2015,decided on 30th June, 2021. Date of hearing: 30th June,2021. (On appeal from judgment dated 09.06.2015 passed bythe Lahore High Court, Lahore
PRESENT: UMAR ATA BANDIAL, JUSTICE, MUNIB AKHTAR, JUSTICE, AMIN-UD-DIN KHAN, JUSTICE
Muhammad Ajmal Khan, Advocate Supreme Court (Video-Link, Lahore) (in all cases) for Petitioners. Muhammad Shakeel, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent (Video-Link, Lahore) (in C.Ps. Nos. 2256-L and 2257-L of 2015). Mian Yousaf Umer, Advocate Supreme Cou
Civil Petition No. 2256-L of 2015 and Civil Petition No.2257-L of 2015 and Civil Petition No. 2283-L of 2015,decided on 30th June, 2021. Date of hearing: 30th June,2021. (On appeal from judgment dated 09.06.2015 passed bythe Lahore High Court, Lahore
PRESENT: UMAR ATA BANDIAL, JUSTICE, MUNIB AKHTAR, JUSTICE, AMIN-UD-DIN KHAN, JUSTICE
Muhammad Ajmal Khan, Advocate Supreme Court (Video-Link, Lahore) (in all cases) for Petitioners. Muhammad Shakeel, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent (Video-Link, Lahore) (in C.Ps. Nos. 2256-L and 2257-L of 2015). Mian Yousaf Umer, Advocate Supreme Cou
PETITIONER(S): MESSRS NISHAT MILLS LIMITED AND ANOTHER
VS
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME/WEALTH TAX, COMPANIES ZONE, FAISALABAD (NOW CIR, LTU, LAHORE)
Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001
Section: 213
Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 1979
Section: 7,62(2),66A
SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN Civil Petition No. 2256-L of 2015 and Civil Petition No. 2257-L of 2015 and Civil Petition No. 2283-L of 2015, decided on 30th June, 2021. Date of hearing: 30th June, 2021. (On appeal from judgment dated 09.06.2015 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in I.T.As. Nos.382-1999 and 383-1999 and PTR No. 675 of 2007) Section 213 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 (‘the 2001 Ordinance’) and section 7 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 (‘the 1979 Ordinance’) [since repealed] were cast in virtually identical terms. In any organization (including a Government department) it was only to be expected that there would be, in the ordinary course and as part of the normal routine, an ongoing consultation and interaction among persons holding different posts in the hierarchy. Junios would wish (and indeed, in most cases, be expected) to seek informal guidance from their seniors, or to be assisted and even instructed by them, and thereby benefit from their experience and the collective institutional wisdom. For example, fresh recruits and probationers were attached for some time to senior officers for this very purpose. But the process was not so narrow or limited. It continued throughout an officer’s career, certainly at the junior or middle levels. Even seniors could benefit from what, other seniors (or even junior officers) may have to offer. Such consultations, communications, interactions, assistance, guidance or instruction were part of the woof and warp of any organization, and that certainly included the bureaucracies of the State. There was nothing strange or exceptional about this. Indeed, it was the absence of such activity that would call for comment and be a matter of concern. It was also to be kept in mind that the informality of the process meant that the assistance, guidance or instruction (under sections 7 and 213 of the 1979 and 2001 Ordinances respectively) was not generally regarded as binding in a formal sense. They were, rather, a resource that was available, and one which inured especially to the benefit of those lower down the hierarchy. It was something that could be usefully and productively drawn upon, as and when needed,…
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