Case Details

Citation(s)
2026 SLG 1573 2026 SLD 1573 = 2026 PTD 724
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue
I.T.A. No.623/IB of 2024, decided on 25th September, 2024.
Presented By:
Muhammad Khurshid for Appellant. Shumail Tareen, DR for
Respondent. Date of hearing: 25th September, 2024.

QAISER AZEEM

VERSUS

The COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, RANGE-I, ZONE SOUTH, RTO, ISLAMABAD

Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

Section: 41 , 111(1)(d)

Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001)--- ----Ss. 41 & 111(1)(d), proviso---Agricultural land within Islamabad Capital Territory---Agricultural income---Whether liable to tax or not---Expression paid tax under the provincial law ---Effect---Whether the agricultural income earned by the taxpayer from land situated within Islamabad Capital Territory is subject to income tax under the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001---Held: Section 41 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, clearly provides an exemption for agricultural income; however, this exemption is subject to the application of S. 111(1) of the Ordinance, 2001, which carries the key phrase as paid tax under the provincial law ; thus, refers to agricultural income tax levied by the provinces---However, in the present case, the appellant's agricultural land is not located within the jurisdiction of any of the provinces of Pakistan---Instead, the land is situated within Islamabad Capital Territory, which does not fall under provincial control---Significantly, there is no existing law that imposes agricultural income tax within the boundaries of Islamabad Capital Territory---Unlike the provinces, which are empowered to levy agricultural income tax under their respective laws, Islamabad Capital Territory is governed by federal law and no corresponding federal legislation has been enacted to impose such a tax---Consequently, the agricultural income derived from land within this territory cannot be subject to agricultural income tax, as no mechanism or law exists to impose or collect it---Since no tax is payable under any provincial law due to the specific location of the land, the proviso to subsection (1)(d) of S.111 of the Ordinance 2001, which concerns unexplained income or assets, does not apply---Thus, in the present case, income in-question is explained and fully accounted for and is not subject to taxation under the law---Importantly, even the tax department had not asserted that the appellant's agricultural land was located within the jurisdiction of any province, which would make it subject to provincial laws regarding the levy of agricultural income tax---If the department had claimed that the…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register