2002 PLP 2549 (PTD)
QUALITY CASTING (PVT.) LTD. through Chief Executive Versus INCOME-TAX OFFICER (COMPANIES), LAHORE and 3 others
| Citation | 2002 PLP 2549 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | Naseem Sikandar and Muhammad Sayeed Akhtar, JJ |
| Parties | QUALITY CASTING (PVT.) LTD. through Chief Executive Versus INCOME-TAX OFFICER (COMPANIES), LAHORE and 3 others |
| Primary Law | Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PLP 2549 (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 2549 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore High Court bench comprising: Naseem Sikandar and Muhammad Sayeed Akhtar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 2549 (PTD) (QUALITY CASTING (PVT.) LTD. through Chief Executive Versus INCOME-TAX OFFICER (COMPANIES), LAHORE and 3 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Kh. Ibrar Majal for Appellant.
- Mian Ashiq Hussain for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
S.12(18)
Share deposit money
Provisions of S.12(18) of Income Tax Ordinance, 1979
Share deposit money could not be taken as a loan to be covered by the mischief of the provisions of S.12(8) of Income Tax Ordinance, 1979
Provisions would not be attracted unless there was a loan received by the assessee and it was so claimed
Where any of the two requirements were not answered, provisions of S.12(18) of the ordinance were not attracted. Messrs Micropak (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal 2001 PTD 1180 rel.
Judgment & Decree
NASEEM SIKANDAR, J.
Learned counsel for the appellant states that the issue in hand already stands resolved by a judgment of this Court now reported as re: Messrs Micropak (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (2001 PTD 1180). Further submits that the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan on 24-10-2001 rejected the appeal against that order filed by the Revenue as Civil Petitions Nos.981-L of 2001, 984 and 988-L of 2001.
2. In that order to which one of us (Naseem Sikandar, J.) was party, it was inter alia found that the share deposit money could not be taken as a loan to be covered by the mischief ,of the provisions of section 12(18) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979. It was also found that at the relevant time the provisions of section 12(18) did not attract unless two conditions were answered. First, that there was a "loan" received by an assessee and secondly, that it was so claimed. Where any of the two requirements were not answered, it was held that these provisions were not attracted.
3. Learned counsel for the Revenue has attempted to distinguish the case in hand. However, we will readily agree with the learned counsel for the appellant that the aforesaid judgment of this Court as maintained by the Hon'ble apex Court stands on all fours and answers all the issues raised in their appeal.
4. For the various reasons stated in the above order of this Court in re: Messrs Mircopak (Pvt.) Ltd. (supra) this appeal shall be allowed. Q.M.H./M.A.K./Q-14/L Appeal allowed.