Case Details

Citation(s)
2004 SLG 186 2004 SLD 186 2004 PTD 1104 (2004) 89 TAX 203
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue
R.A: Nos. 327/LB and 360/LB of 2003, decision dated: 27-08-2003
KHAWAJA FAROOQ SAEED, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND IMTIAZ ANJUM, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
M. Akram Tahir, D.R. for Applicant (in R.A. No. 327/LB of 2003). Naveed A. Andrabi for
Respondent (in R.A. No. 327/LB of 2003). Naveed A. Andrabi for Applicant (in R.A. No. 360/LB of 2003). M. Akram Tahir, D.R. for
Respondent (in R.A. No. 360/LB of 2003)

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: 12,12(9A)SecondSched.;PartIV,Cl.(59),136

(a) Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)-----S. 12(9A) & Second Sched.; Part IV, Cl. (59)---Companies Ordinance (XLVII of 1984), S. 245---Income deemed to accrue or arise in Pakistan---Companies Ordinance, 1984 is separate with its own implication and S. 12(9A) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 read with Cl. 59 of Part IV of Second Sched. of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 was entirely different and independent---Purpose of the two enactments may be similar, however, application and implication of their default were also not interlinked---Default of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 had to be dealt with under its own provisions. (b) Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)--- ----Ss.136, 12(9A) & Second Sched., Part IV, Cl. (59)---Companies Ordinance (XLVII of 1984), S.245---Reference to High Court---Deemed income---Over rule of time limit for distribution of dividends---No overriding effect of provisions of Companies Ordinance, 1984 over the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979---Question referred without substance--¬Validity---When it is said that remedial provision in terms of Cl. (59) in Part IV of the Second Sched. of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 had come to reduce the rigours of S.12(9A) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 and for this purpose it is commented that this may perhaps was by keeping in view S.245 of the Companies Ordinance, 1984 it did not mean that it had considered the provisions of Companies Ordinance, 1984 as applicable in the income-tax proceedings because it was only a comment to say that in the presence of the governing clause under S.245 of the Companies Ordinance, 1984 the introduction of S.12(9A) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 was not justified, this however, did not mean that after its introduction its application could be corrupted by taking queue from the language of the provisions of the Companies Ordinance, 1984---While defining a provision in an enactment, help from other laws was never safe---Reference applications were rejected by the Appellate Tribunal on the ground that questions were not properly drafted and were also without substance. (c) Interpretation of statutes--- ----While defining a provision in an enactment, help from…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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