2016 PLP 1078 (PTD)
K.B. ENTERPRISES through Partner Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary and 4 others
| Citation | 2016 PLP 1078 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | Ayesha A. Malik, J |
| Parties | K.B. ENTERPRISES through Partner Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary and 4 others |
| Primary Law | Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2016 PLP 1078 (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2016 PLP 1078 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore High Court bench comprising: Ayesha A. Malik, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2016 PLP 1078 (PTD) (K.B. ENTERPRISES through Partner Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary and 4 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Khubaib Ahmad for Petitioner.
- Sarfraz Ahmad Cheema for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 122(9) & 131
Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199
Constitutional petition
Fresh show-cause notice issued during pendency of appeal before Appellate Tribunal
Scope
Contention of petitioner/taxpayer was that appeal had been filed by Department against the order of Commissioner of Inland Revenue which was still pending and since the matter was pending before Appellate Tribunal, Department could not issue a fresh show cause notice on the same matter to the petitioner
Held, that since appeal of Department was pending before Appellate Tribunal, there was no occasion to issue a fresh show-cause notice, hence, impugned show-cause notice was set aside and Department was directed to pursue their appeal before Appellate Tribunal
Constitutional petition was allowed accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
AYESHA A. MALIK, J.
Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that against the order of Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals) dated 28.11.2012, an appeal has been filed by the Respondent Department which is still pending. States that since the matter of the Respondent Department is pending before the Appellate Tribunal (Inland Revenue), Lahore, the Respondents cannot issue a fresh show cause notice on the same matter. States that any grievance that they may have with respect to the order passed by the Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals) should be raised before the Appellate Tribunal.
2. Learned counsel for the Respondents states that no decision has been taken on the appeal. Further states that Respondent No.3 may look into the matter and pass a speaking order on the issue.
3. I have heard both the learned counsel and find that admittedly an appeal is pending on the same matter with respect to the same allegations and the same amount of Rs.1,850,156/-. Since the appeal of the Respondent Department is pending, there is no occasion to issue a fresh show cause notice. Therefore, the impugned show cause notice is set aside and the Respondents should pursue their appeal before the Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue.
4. Petition is allowed in the above terms. RR/K-35/L Petition allowed.