PTD 1989

1989 PLP 687 (PTD)

Messrs SEABANA ENTERPRISES Versus TAX OFFICER CIRCLE XVII A S T ZONE, KARACHI and 3 others

Jurisdiction / Court
Karachi High Court
Decided Date
Constitutional petition No.D-590 of 1987, decided on 25th May, 1988.
Honorable Judges
Ajmal Mian and Abdul Rasool Agha, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1989 PLP 687 (PTD)
Forum / Court Karachi High Court
Bench Members Ajmal Mian and Abdul Rasool Agha, JJ
Parties Messrs SEABANA ENTERPRISES Versus TAX OFFICER CIRCLE XVII A S T ZONE, KARACHI and 3 others
Primary Law Income-tax Act (XI of 1922)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 687 (PTD)?

This judgment primarily cites: Income-tax Act (XI of 1922) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 687 (PTD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Karachi High Court bench comprising: Ajmal Mian and Abdul Rasool Agha, JJ.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 687 (PTD) (Messrs SEABANA ENTERPRISES Versus TAX OFFICER CIRCLE XVII A S T ZONE, KARACHI and 3 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Income-tax Act (XI of 1922)

Representation

  • Muhammad Hanif Khan for Petitioner.
  • Abul Khair Ansari, for Respondents.

Headnotes / Summary

Ss. 66 & 160--Constitution of Pakistan (1973) Art. 199--Constitutional jurisdiction--Stay by High Court--Limitation--Application by department for permission to proceed with the assessment as according to the department after 30th June, 1988 the assessment may become time-barred--High Court allowed the department tea proceed with the assessment on the condition that the order will not be implemented for a period of six months from the date of the order as stay granted by High Court can operate for period of six months.

Judgment & Decree

AJMAL MIAN J.--This is an application f-led by the respondents for permission to proceed with the assessment as according to the respondents after 30th June, 1988, the assessment may become time barred. This was contested by the learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Mohammad Hanif, who has submitted that in terms of Sections 66 and 160 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, no question of limitation is involved: The above contention may be correct but the fact remains that in view of clause 4-A of Article 199 of the Constitution of 1973, the stay can operate for a period of 6 months, which has already expired in the present case. In similar cases, we have allowed the respondents to proceed with the assessment on the condition that the order will not be implemented for a period of 6 months from the date of the order. We pass the same order in the present petition. Order accordingly. Let this petition may also be fixed for regular hearing after re-opening of the Court after summer vacation. M.B.A./S-363/K. Order accordingly.