2002 PLP 2775 (PTD)
C. I. T., SIALKOT Versus Messrs FAIR MOONT INDUSTRIES
| Citation | 2002 PLP 2775 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | Naseem Sikandar and Jawwad S. Khawaja Khawaja, JJ |
| Parties | C. I. T., SIALKOT Versus Messrs FAIR MOONT INDUSTRIES |
| Primary Law | Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PLP 2775 (PTD)?
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 PLP 2775 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore High Court bench comprising: Naseem Sikandar and Jawwad S. Khawaja Khawaja, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 2775 (PTD) (C. I. T., SIALKOT Versus Messrs FAIR MOONT INDUSTRIES). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Shafqat Mehmood Chohan for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 7th February, 2001.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 136
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1981, Rr: 10 & H-- Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XLI, R.1
Dismissal of appeal by the Appellate Tribunal on account of alleged violation of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1981
Rule 11 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1981 had an independent status having no nexus with the O.XLI, R.1 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908
In matters of collection of revenue the dispute could not be allowed to be determined in a perfunctory manner as had been done, in the present case, by the Tribunal
High Court disapproved the dismissal of appeal by the Tribunal of the reason that memo of appeal contained argument at grounds which was violative of R.10 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules. 1981
High Court allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned judgment of the Tribunal and directed that appeal filed shall be deemed pending and shall be heard and disposed of on merits in accordance with law. C.I.T. v. Muhammad Tariq Javaid 2000 PTD 2165 and Pakistan Industrial Gases Ltd. v. C.I.T. and another 2000 PTD 2903 rel.
Judgment & Decree
NASEEM SIKANDAR, J.
This further appeal under section 136(1) of the Income Tax Ordinance assails the dismissal of appeal filed by the appellant on account of alleged violation of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1981.
2. After hearing the learned counsel we will agree at the outset that the issue in hand already stands resolved in favour of the appellant by a Division Bench of this Court in Re. CIT v. Muhammad Tariq Javid 2000 PTD 2165. In that case, it was inter alia held that rule 11 of the ITAT Rules, 1981 had an independent status having no nexus with the Order 41 .rule 1 of, C.P.C. Also that in matters of collection of revenue the dispute could not be allowed to be determined in a perfunctory manner as had been done by the Tribunal. In another recent judgment Re: Pakistan Industrial Gases Ltd. v. CIT and another (2000 PTD 2903) another Division Bench of this Court disapproved the dismissal of appeal by the Tribunal for the reason that memo. of appeal contained argumentative grounds which was violative of rule 10 of the said Rules.
3. For the various reasons recorded in CTR No.89/93, in which the issue has been dealt with at length in the light of the aforesaid two judgments, we will allow this appeal and set aside the impugned judgment of the Tribunal. The appeal filed by the appellant shall therefore, be deemed pending before it heard and disposed of on merits in accordance with law. C.M.A./M.A.K./C-176/L Appeal allowed.