Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 1979

Section: 66(1),66(2),66(5),135,136,137

Law: Limitation Act, 1908

Section: 5

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 98

Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 (XXXI of 1979) Section 136...Effect of amendment Provisions amended ,and expression Appeal' employed Whether amended provision has akered fundamentais of jurisdiction of the High Court Held no Words, 'appeal' and 'appellate jurisdiction meaning of. From the aforesaid juxtapositional study of the old and new provision, we are quite clear to hold that amended section has not aftered fundamentais of jurisdiction of this Court. The statutory mechanism of moving the Income Tax Tribunal in the First instance, had been totally eliminated and the Assessee/payer/Commissioner had been blessed with a right to claim answers on question of Law from this Court straightway, On this view of the matter, it is thus clear that the change brought in the nominclature of this provision is cosmetic in nature and is designed to obligerate procedural pre conditionalities. Manifestly, neither the nature of jurisdiction of this Court nor its ambit has been changed. This amendment has been made in deference to observation of Supreme Court made in Pakistan v. Majistic Cinema (PLD 1965 SC 379). On this analysis 'of of and new provision, we have thus, reached the conclusion that the expression 'appeal' employed in the new provisions is simply cosmetic in nature and powers of this Court under the of section. Cases referred to: C. I. T v. M. B. Qureshi (1975) 32 Tax 219); Bisvll Spinners LTD. v. Supdt. C. E. & L. C. (PLD 1988 S. C. 370): Ashok Mofors LTD. v. Commr. of I.T 71 (1961 / P.T.D. 736); Ha]i Muhammad Ibrahim v. SurrayaunNisa, etc. (PLD 1992 S. C. 637); Pakistan v. Ma/1stic Cinema (PLD 1965 SC. 379); Australian Sporting Club LTD. Re Dash: (1947 47 N. SWWN. 283; Garikapati Veeraya v. N. Subbiah Ch. (P. I. D. 1957 S. C. (ind) 448);F. A. Khan v. Government or Pakistan (PLD 1964 S. C. 520); Debi Prasad in M. Phundan Lal(AIF1 1942 Oudh 29 7; Jan Muhammad v. Rabia Begum (1992 CLC 78); Muhammad Ibrahim v. Surraya unNisa (PLD 1992 SC 637); C. I. 71 v, Gohar Ayub Khan (1995) 71 Tax 271 (H. C. Iah. ) = 1995 PTD 1074). B. Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 (XXXXI of 1979) Section 63, clause (1185) of the Second Schedule Exemption Best assessment Assessee claimed exemption…

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