2002 PLP 2714 (PTD)
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, FAISALABAD Versus Messrs FAROOQ MUMTAZ COTTON GINNING MILLS (PVT.) LTD., GUJRAT
| Citation | 2002 PLP 2714 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | Naseem Sikandar and Muhammad Saeed Akhtar, JJ |
| Parties | COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, FAISALABAD Versus Messrs FAROOQ MUMTAZ COTTON GINNING MILLS (PVT.) LTD., GUJRAT |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PLP 2714 (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2002 PLP 2714 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore High Court bench comprising: Naseem Sikandar and Muhammad Saeed Akhtar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 2714 (PTD) (COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, FAISALABAD Versus Messrs FAROOQ MUMTAZ COTTON GINNING MILLS (PVT.) LTD., GUJRAT). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Judgment & Decree
NASEEM SIKANDAR, J.
In this P.T.R. under section 136 (2) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, the Commissioner, Income Tax/Wealth Tax Companies Zone, Faisalabad has proposed the following questions of law which are stated to have arisen out of the order of the Tribunal, dated 26-10-2000:-- (i) "Whether the facts and circumstances of the case justify the deletion of WWF when subsection (1) of section 4 of Workers' Welfare Fund Ordinance, 1971, clearly says that WWF is payable by Industrial undertakings on the total assessable income in a year and not taxable income? (ii) Whether the facts and circumstances of the case justify that exempt industrial undertakings are not chargeable to pay WWF whereas exempt Industrial undertakings under section 48 are chargeable to WWF? (iii) Whether the facts and circumstances of the case justify the deletion of WWF on exempt industrial undertakings when Workers' Welfare Fund Ordinance, 1971, has not based charge of WWF on taxable income?
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner- revenue we will refuse to entertain these questions. As rightly observed by the learned Members of the Tribunals on 21-5-2001 when they refused a reference of the aforesaid questions to this Court the matter stands finally resolved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan through an order recorded in Civil Petitions Nos. 38, 156 to 180, 199 to 276, 278 to 283, 285 to 320, 323 to 421.and 518 to 524 of 2600, dated 28-3-2002.
3. Dismissed. Q.M.H./M.A.K./C-161/L Reference dismissed.