2002 PT D 348 (PLP)
Messrs TAXNET (PVT.) LIMITED Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Minister of Finance, Revenue Division, Islamabad and others
| Citation | 2002 PT D 348 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | Mansoor Ahmad, J |
| Parties | Messrs TAXNET (PVT.) LIMITED Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Minister of Finance, Revenue Division, Islamabad and others |
| Primary Law | Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PT D 348 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2002 PT D 348 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore High Court bench comprising: Mansoor Ahmad, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PT D 348 (PLP) (Messrs TAXNET (PVT.) LIMITED Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Minister of Finance, Revenue Division, Islamabad and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Anwarul Haq for Petitioner.
- Muhammad Ilyas Khan for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
S.129 [as amended by Finance Ordinance (XXI of 2000)]
C. B. R Circular No. 3 of 2001, dated 23-5-2001
Prospective in effect-- Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199
Constitutional petition
Precondition for filing appeal to deposit 15 % of the amount of tax assessed-- Petitioner against assessment year 1998-99 filed appeal before Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) who directed him to deposit 15%, of the amount of tax assessed in view of the amendment made in S.129 of Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 through Finance Ordinance, 2000-- Validity
Appeal of petitioner filed against assessment year 1998-99 did not fall within the mischief of such amendment as having-been clarified by Central Board of Revenue through Circular No. 3, dated 23-5-2001 that such amendment was prospective in operation and would not apply to any previous assessment year
Appeal of petitioner, had been entertained and decided by Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) without requiring him to deposit 15% tax demand in view of interim order of High Court passed in Constitutional petition
Grievance petitioner having stood redressed, Constitutional petition was disposed of having borne fruit.
Judgment & Decree
Ch. Anwarul Haq for Petitioner. Muhammad Ilyas Khan for Respondents. Through the present writ petition the petitioner called into question the amendment introduced through Finance Act, 2000 whereby the provision of section 129 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 was amended and for filing an appeal from the assessment order pre-condition of deposit of 15 % of the tax assessed was imposed.
2. An assessment order for assessment year 1998-99 was passed in the case of the petitioner by Special Officer of Income Tax Circle 11, Zone-II, Lahore whereby a tax demand of Rs. 2,21,617 as stated in the petition, was created against the petitioner. The petitioner filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax Appeal, Lahore whereby the condition of 15% deposit of tax assessed was pressed into service. Consequently the petitioner filed the present writ petition. .
3. The Central Board of Revenue through Circular No. 3, dated 23-5-2001 clarified that the amendment introduced by Finance Act, 2000 was prospective in its operation and it did not apply to any previous assessment year. In view of this clarification the appeal of the petitioner for the assessment year 1999-99 did not fall within mischief of the amendment. In any case this Court vide interim order, dated 7-5-2001 passed in the instant writ petition on 25-5-2001 instructed the Commissioner 4f Income-tax Appeal to entertain the appeal of the petitioner and dispose of the same according to law without insisting upon the pre-condition of deposit of 1% tax demand.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner informed that the appeal was entertained and decided by the Commissioner of Appeal. In view of the statement of the learned counsel, the grievances of the petitioner stand redressed, accordingly the writ petition is disposed of having borne fruit. S.A.K./M.A.K./T-64/L Writ petition disposed of.