| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1995 SLG 42 1995 SLD 42 1995 PTCL 258 1995 PTD 482 (1995) 71 TAX 126 |
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue
I.T.As. Nos. 3789/LB and 4197/LB of 1994, decision dated: 27-12-1994.hearing DATE : 15-11-1994.
MUJIBULLAH SIDDIQUI, CHAIRMAN, IRSHAD AHMAD NASIM SIKANDAR, JUDICIAL MEMBERS, INAM ELLAHI SHEIKH AND IFTIKHAR AHMAD BAJWA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBERS
Dr. Ilyas Zafar, Fayyaz Ahmad Ch. and Abdul Hamid Oamar, ITP for Appellant. Iqbal Naeem Pasha, Mansoor Ahmed Khan and Latif Shahid. Amicus curiae. Shabaz Butt. LA. and Nawal Rai N. Oad. D.R. for
Respondent
I.T.As. Nos. 3789/LB and 4197/LB of 1994, decision dated: 27-12-1994.hearing DATE : 15-11-1994.
MUJIBULLAH SIDDIQUI, CHAIRMAN, IRSHAD AHMAD NASIM SIKANDAR, JUDICIAL MEMBERS, INAM ELLAHI SHEIKH AND IFTIKHAR AHMAD BAJWA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBERS
Dr. Ilyas Zafar, Fayyaz Ahmad Ch. and Abdul Hamid Oamar, ITP for Appellant. Iqbal Naeem Pasha, Mansoor Ahmed Khan and Latif Shahid. Amicus curiae. Shabaz Butt. LA. and Nawal Rai N. Oad. D.R. for
Respondent
Deprecated: preg_match(): Passing null to parameter #2 ($subject) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 411
Deprecated: htmlspecialchars(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 435
Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 1979
Section: 134(3)
(a) Interpretation of statutes---Retrospectivity of an enactment---Answer to the question regarding the retrospection of a statute is to be found in the principle of fairness rather than by reference to whether the statute affects vested or subordinate rights or only it relates to the procedure of the Court. Statutory Interpretation by Bennion, 2nd Edn., pp214, 218; Maxwell on Interpretation of Statutes, 12th Edn. (1969), p.215; Carson v. Carson and Stoyed (1964)1 WLR 511, 516; Craies on Statute Law, 7th Edn. (1971), p.387; Lauri v. Renad (1892) 3 Ch.402, 421; Yew Ben Tew v. Kenderaan Bas Mara (1983)1 AC 553, 588; Amold v. Central Electricity Generating Board (1987) 3 All ER 694 (HL); Writh v. Hale (1860) 30 LJ Exch. 40; Pollock C.E. Cardner v. Lucas (1878) 3 AC 582 Republic of Costa Rica v. Erlanger (1876) 3 Chap. D.62; Yew Ben Tew v. Kenderaan Bas Mara, (1983) 1 AC 553; Mundowa (1992) 3 All ER 606-613; Secretary of State v. Tunnicaliffe (1991) 2 All ER 712 and L. Office Cherifien v. Yamashista Ltd. (1994) 1 All ER 20 quoted. (b) Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)--- ----S.134 (3), proviso [as added by Finance Act (XII of 1994)]---Application of S.134(3), proviso---Scope---Provision of S.134(3), proviso would not affect the right of appeal of the assessees before the Appellate Tribunal. Subsection (1) of section 134 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 provides that an assessee objecting to an order passed by an Appellate Commissioner under section 111 or 132 or subsection (2) of section 148 or an order under section 156 having the effect of enhancing the assessment or reducing the refund or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee, may appeal to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal against such order. The proviso to subsection (3) of section 134 added to the Ordinance by Finance Act, 1994 (Act XII of 1994) which came into force with effect from 1-7-1994, however, provides that no appeal except in the case of an appeal filed by the Commissioner, shall lie unless an amount not less than fifty per cent. of the amount of tax assessed has been paid. The contention that notwithstanding anything in the proviso the assessees are entitled to file the appeal in…
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