PTD 2008

2008 PLP 940 (PTD)

INDUS JUTE MILLS (PVT.) LTD. through Chief Executive Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ENFORCEMENT DIVISION-I, LAHORE

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore High Court
Decided Date
Writ Petition No.334 of 2008, decided on 4th February, 2008.
Honorable Judges
Kh. Farooq Saeed, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2008 PLP 940 (PTD)
Forum / Court Lahore High Court
Bench Members Kh. Farooq Saeed, J
Parties INDUS JUTE MILLS (PVT.) LTD. through Chief Executive Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ENFORCEMENT DIVISION-I, LAHORE
Primary Law Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 940 (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 2008 PLP 940 (PTD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore High Court bench comprising: Kh. Farooq Saeed, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP 940 (PTD) (INDUS JUTE MILLS (PVT.) LTD. through Chief Executive Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ENFORCEMENT DIVISION-I, LAHORE). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001)

Representation

  • Ch. Anwar-ul-Haq for Petitioner.
  • Shahid Jamil for Respondent.

Headnotes / Summary

Ss.153(6) & 159

Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199

Constitutional petition

Refusal to grant exemption certificate

Petitioner which was a manufacturing and export unit, had challenged in constitutional petition, Authorities' action to refuse to grant exemption certificate

Petitioner/assessee had contended that it had suffered a loss of Rs.15,24,55,563, upto the tax year 2006 and that loss was so huge that assessee was not likely to be charged tax for relevant year or for the coming many years

Validity

High Court being conscious of the fact that impugned order of Commissioner through which exemption certificate had been refused was appealable, but since said remedy of appeal was not efficacious and expeditious and the department's attitude of refusal ignoring all the facts, being against the accrued rights to the petitioner, it was that exemption certificate be issued

Such direction, however, was only for one time exemption certificate for export of the consignment which was pending; for subsequent proceedings, Department would verify the facts and after satisfaction would release exemption certificate as per law and rules.

Judgment & Decree

KH. FAROOQ SAEED, J.

This petition filed by Messrs Indus Jute Mills (Pvt.) Limited, has challenged the respondent's action to refuse to grant the exemption certificate by arguing it to be as against law, facts and circumstances of the case.

2. Brief facts leading to this petition are that the assessee taxpayer has suffered a loss of Rs.15,24,55,563 up to the tax year 2006. The assessee claims that the loss is so huge that he is not likely to be charged to the tax for this year or in the coming many years. The petitioner is a manufacturing and export unit, in addition to the local supply of jute items. The export of the assessee is neither subject to presumptive tax regime nor the provision of subsection (6) of section 153 applies on him being a manufacturer. Moreover, he has already paid a total amount of tax at Rs.20,00,

245. This amount statedly is on account of deduction on export proceeds as well as on electricity bill amounting to Rs.19,92,245 and Rs.8000 respectively. The requirement of the Department even on the basis of the earlier tax charged for three quarters come to Rs.16,35,

008. Resultantly, the petitioner has already deposited, by virtue of deduction, a sum of Rs.3,65,237 in excess of the required instalment as advance tax.

3. The facts and circumstances of the case clearly warrant interference of this Court through this writ petition. This Court is fully conscious of the fact that the order of the Commissioner through which the exemption certificate has been refused is appealable, but, however, since the remedy is not efficacious and expeditious and the Department attitude of refusal ignoring all the facts above being against the accrued right to the petitioner, this Court has no hesitation in directing for issuance of an exemption certificate. However, this direction is only for one time exemption certificate for export of the consignment which is pending as stated by the petitioner. For subsequent proceedings, the department shall verify the above facts and after satisfaction, release exemption certificate as per law and rules. This writ petition, therefore, is disposed of with the above direction. H.B.T./I-5/L Order accordingly.