| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1958 SLG 29 1958 SLD 29 1958 PLD 81 (1959) 1 TAX 290 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeals Nos. 2D, 3D, 4D, 5D aid 29 of 1957, decided on 29th November 1957. dates of hearing : 28th and 29th November 1957. (On appeal from the judgments and orders of the High Court of East Pakistan, Dacca, dated the 24th April 1956 and 22nd Novembe
MUHAMMAD MUNIR, C., J, M. SHAHABUDDIN AND MUHAMMAD SHARIF, JJ
Asrarul Hossain, Advocate, Supreme Court, instructed by K. Hossain, Attorney for Appellant. Radhikaranjan Guha, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court, Moinul Huq and A. K. M. Nurul Islam, Advocates, Supreme Court, with him), instructed by Nandalal Das, Attorney
Civil Appeals Nos. 2D, 3D, 4D, 5D aid 29 of 1957, decided on 29th November 1957. dates of hearing : 28th and 29th November 1957. (On appeal from the judgments and orders of the High Court of East Pakistan, Dacca, dated the 24th April 1956 and 22nd Novembe
MUHAMMAD MUNIR, C., J, M. SHAHABUDDIN AND MUHAMMAD SHARIF, JJ
Asrarul Hossain, Advocate, Supreme Court, instructed by K. Hossain, Attorney for Appellant. Radhikaranjan Guha, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court, Moinul Huq and A. K. M. Nurul Islam, Advocates, Supreme Court, with him), instructed by Nandalal Das, Attorney
Civil Appeals Nos. 2D to 4D of 1957 THE PROVINCIAL LIBRARY
VS
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EAST PAKISTAN- Civil Appeal No. 5D of 1957 SATISH CHANDRA BISWAS vs THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EAST PAKISTAN- AND Civil Appeal No. 29 of 1957 Haft
Law: Income Tax Act, 1922
Section: 66A(2)
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: 109,110
(a) Income-tax Act (XI of 1922), S. 66-A (2)-Appeal to Supreme Court---Competence-Question to be decided solely on terms of S. 66-A (2)---Civil Procedure Code (11 of 1908), Ss. 109 & 110-Letters Patent (Dacca), Cl. 39-[Feroze Shah v. Income-Tax Commissioner Punjab cd N.-W. F, P. A I R 1931 Lah. 138 wrongly decided]. Where the question is whether an appeal to the Supreme Court lies in an income-tax matter, the question has first to be decided not with reference to sections 109 and 110 of the Code of Civil Procedure, but solely on the terms of subsection (2) of section 66-A of the Act, though once the case is held to fall within that subsection, the provisions of the Code relating to appeals to the Supreme Court will apply to the appeal as if it were an appeal from a decree of a High Court. No appeal lies either under clause 39 of the Letters Patent or under section 109 read with section 110 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The Supreme Court's jurisdiction to entertain a statutory appeal in matters arising under the Income-tax Act is limited to the case mentioned in subsection (2) and that such jurisdiction can be invoked only where the High Court has delivered a on a reference made to it under section 66 and also certified the case to be a fit one for appeal to the Supreme Court. Feroze Shah v. Income Tax Commissioner Punjab ca TI.-W. F. P. A I R 1931 Lah. 138 wrongly decided. Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. v. Chief Revenue Authority of Bombay 50 I A 212 ; Delhi Cloth of General Mills Co. Ltd. v. Income Tax Commissioner, Delhi and others 54 I A 421 ; Feroze Shah v. Commissioner of Income-Tax Punjab 60 I A 325 and Seth Prem Chand Satram Das v. The State of Bihar 1951SCR161:AIR1951SC14 ref. (b) Income-tax Act (XI of 1922), S. 66 (2)-High Court's jurisdiction-Nature of---Neither Original nor Appellate, but special statutory jurisdiction. When a High Court rejects an assessee' s application under subsection (2) of section 66 and declines to call upon the appellate Tribunal to state a case, it does not act in exercise of its original or appellate jurisdiction but only in exercise of a special statutory jurisdiction conferred on it by the Income-tax. Act. JUDGMENT…
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