| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2004 SLG 104 2004 SLD 104 2004 PTCL 43 2004 PTD 1 (2003) 88 TAX 337 |
Lahore High Court
Writ Petitions Nos. 9979, 4699, 6478, 3896, 6471, 929, 2358, 4029, 4054, 4055, 4056, 4057, 4143, 4144, 4319, 4320, 4358, 4407, 4470, 4481, 4545, 4546, and 10328 of 2003, decision dated: 24-09-2003.hearing DATE : 5-08-2003
NASIM SIKANDAR, J
Muhammad Ilyas Khan, Shahid Jamil and Mian Yousaf Umar for
Respondents Mian Ashiq Hussain, Siraj-ud-Din Khalid,.Naeem Shah, Rana Muhammad Afzal, Shahbaz Butt, M. Iqbal Hashmi and Shafqat Mehmood Chohan for Petitioners
Writ Petitions Nos. 9979, 4699, 6478, 3896, 6471, 929, 2358, 4029, 4054, 4055, 4056, 4057, 4143, 4144, 4319, 4320, 4358, 4407, 4470, 4481, 4545, 4546, and 10328 of 2003, decision dated: 24-09-2003.hearing DATE : 5-08-2003
NASIM SIKANDAR, J
Muhammad Ilyas Khan, Shahid Jamil and Mian Yousaf Umar for
Respondents Mian Ashiq Hussain, Siraj-ud-Din Khalid,.Naeem Shah, Rana Muhammad Afzal, Shahbaz Butt, M. Iqbal Hashmi and Shafqat Mehmood Chohan for Petitioners
Messrs SAHIB TEXTILES (PVT.) LTD. through Managing Director, Faisalabad
VS
FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Finance, Secretariat, Islamabad and 4 others
Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 1979
Section: 7,8,59,62
Law: General Clauses Act, 1897
Section: 23
(a) Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)----S. 59---Self-Assessment Scheme---Development of the scheme--¬History and background---Unchanging desire of Revenue to have absolute jurisdiction to pick up any assessee out of the scheme for total audit---Method suggested for saving Revenue from such endless exercises and assessees from unjust harassment. (b) Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)----- ----Ss. 7, 8 & 59---Fixation of a cut off date for doing a job and then its extension within domain of Board of Revenue being a pure policy matter---Fixation of such date has nothing to do with assessee, who has already filed return---Extension in cut off date would not give birth to any corresponding liability or responsibility on the part of taxpayer--¬Principles. Central Board of Revenue has authority to issue direction to subordinate authorities fixing a date for doing a job and then extending the same. Not only in matters of such scheme, the Board is otherwise competent to make orders under sections 7 and 8 of Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 for the purposes mentioned in those provisions. The fixation of a cut off, date for doing a particular job and then its extension is a pure policy matter falling within the domain of the officers in the official hierarchy. The fixation of such date has nothing to do with the assesses, who had already filed their returns. If the Central Board of Revenue fixed a certain period for a certain officer or a region to recover the outstanding revenue and that dead line is not met by the concerned officer or the region it would not mean that the amounts, which could not be recovered during that period, had become non-recoverable or time-barred allowing the assessee taxpayers a right to refuse to pay the-same. The extension in cut off date does not give birth to any corresponding liability or responsibility on the part of taxpayers. When both original cut off date and its extension are made by Central Board of Revenue, then there would be no question of violation of the direction of the Board by a subordinate Revenue Authority. Such extension is nothing more than a direction by superior autho¬rity to complete a job already assigned to a lower…
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