| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1980 SLG 109 1980 SLD 109 (1980) 42 TAX 105 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
C.P.S. L.A. No. 19 of 1980, decision dated: 16-3-1980
DUMB PATEL AND NASIM HASAN SHAH, JJ
S. Abdul Haque, Senior Advocate, S. Riazul Haque, Advocate and lftikar-ud-Din Ahmad, A.0.R. for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents
C.P.S. L.A. No. 19 of 1980, decision dated: 16-3-1980
DUMB PATEL AND NASIM HASAN SHAH, JJ
S. Abdul Haque, Senior Advocate, S. Riazul Haque, Advocate and lftikar-ud-Din Ahmad, A.0.R. for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LAHORE
VS
MAHBOOB COTTON FACTORY AND OIL MILLS, LAHORE
Law: Income Tax Act, 1922
Section: 26
Income Tax Act, 1922 (XI of 1922) -Section 26 A (as amended by the Finance Act, 1974)-Leave to appeal to Supreme Court-Question whether amendment made in Section 26A by the Finance Act, 1974 was retrospective Leave to appeal granted to examine the question. ORDER Dorab in PATEL, J.-The respondent is a firm which was registered under Section 26A of the Income Tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter called the said Act), but the Income Tax Officer held that it had failed to renew its registration for the assessment year 1967-68. The respondent"s contention was that it had held its application for the renewal of its registration, but before a different Income Tax Officer, therefore, it challenged the refusal of the Income Tax Officer to renew its registration in an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal allowed the respondent"s appeal by its order dated 2-2-1976 with the observation: "The appellant being a registered firm in the immediately preceding assessment year and no change having occurred in its constitution under sub-section (3) of Section 26A the renewal of registration had to be allowed automatically in view of the amendment by Finance Act XI of 1974. In view of change in law no renewal application was at all necessary. In this view of the matter we modify the Income Tax Officer"s order by setting aside the Income Tax Officer"s finding regarding status and allow claim of registration in view of the changed provisions of law". The petitioner was aggrieved by this finding and applied to the Tribunal under section 66 (1) of the said Act for referring to the High court the question whether the respondent was not required…
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