Case Details

Citation(s)
2022 SLG 2115 2022 SLD 2115 2022 PTD 1632
Islamabad High Court
C.M. No. 480 of 2021 in I.T.R. No. 04 of 2015, C.M. No. 481 of 2021 in I. T.R. No. 01 of 2017, C.M. No. 482 of 2021 in I.T.R. No. 39 of 2018, C.M. No. 479 of 2021 in I.T.R. No. 40 of 2018 and C.M. No. 477 of 2021 in I.T.R. No. 41 of 2018, decision Dated:
MOHSIN AKHTAR KAYANI, JUSTICE, FIAZ AHMAD ANJUM, JANDRAN, JUSTICE
Ali Sibtain Fazli for Appellants.

MESSRS TELENOR PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD.

VS

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INLAND REVENUE, ISLAMABAD AND OTHERS

Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

Section: 133

JUDGMENT: AAMER FAROOQ, JUSTICE:---.--- The petitioner was selected for audit under section 72-B of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 (‘the Act’) for the Tax Year July 2013 to June 2014. It approached this Court by way of Writ Petition No 570/2016, which was disposed of on 18.05.2018. Respondent No 3 issued a show-cause notice to the petitioner on 23.10.2018, alleging discrepancies pursuant to the audit report; the referred notice was duly responded, however, the same culminated in Order-in-Original on 29-12.2018. Appeal was preferred by the Commissioner (Appeals) against the said Order-in-Original, which was decided vide order dated 12.02.2019, whereby partially the same was accepted but the issue pertaining the inadmissibility of tax was decided against the petitioner. Both the parties challenged the order-in-appeal before the Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue, which was decided on 28.09.2021 and on the same date recovery was effected, against the petitioner in the sum of Rs.976,462,191/- under section 48 of the Act read with Rule 71 of the Sales Tax Rules, 2006 (‘the Rules’). The said recovery was effected from the Bank accounts of petitioner on the same date. The petitioner filed Tax Reference against the of the Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue (S.T.R No. 17/2021) which is pending before the Division Bench of this Court and a status quo order was passed in the same on 20.10.2021. The petitioner is aggrieved of recovery effected from the Bank accounts of petitioner. 2. Mr. Abuzar Salman Khan Niazi, AHC along with Mr. Waseem Abid, AHC appearing on behalf of the petitioner, inter alia, contended that recovery has been effected in violation of Rule 71 of the Rules as well as Section 48 ibid. Learned counsel took the Court through the provisions to substantiate the argument that the same could not have been done. He also made reference to decision of this Court in case titled Oracle Systems Pakistan (Private) Limited v. Pakistan through the Secretary Revenue and Ex Officio Chairman Federal Board of Revenue (FBR), Islamabad and others ‘(W.P. No.3876/2021) as well as “Attock Refinery Limited v. Federation of Pakistan and others’ (W.P. No.2321/2022). 3. Mr. Saeed Ahmed…
🔒
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