1985 PLP 298 (PTD)
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME‑TAX Versus Messrs RECKITT & COLMAN OF PAKISTAN Ltd.
| Citation | 1985 PLP 298 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi High Court |
| Bench Members | Ajmal Mian and Haider Ali Pirzada, JJ |
| Parties | THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME‑TAX Versus Messrs RECKITT & COLMAN OF PAKISTAN Ltd. |
| Primary Law | Income‑tax Act (XI of 1922)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 PLP 298 (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 1985 PLP 298 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi High Court bench comprising: Ajmal Mian and Haider Ali Pirzada, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 PLP 298 (PTD) (THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME‑TAX Versus Messrs RECKITT & COLMAN OF PAKISTAN Ltd.). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- A.A. Shareef for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 16th August, 1984.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑ S.10 (4)(a)(c)‑‑ Pension Fund‑‑ Contribution to‑‑Absence of arrange ments for deduction of tax from payment‑‑Validity of allowance‑‑Held, it was justified to allow contribution for which no effective arrangements for deduction of tax from payment out of it were made as required under S.10(4)(a) of Income‑tax Act, 1922. Rashida Patel for Applicant.
Judgment & Decree
Rashida Patel for Applicant. A.A. Shareef for Respondent. Date of hearing: 16th August, 1984. AJMAL MIAN, J. ‑This income‑tax reference has been filed by the applicant under section 66(1) of income‑tax Act for decision on the following question : "Whether on the facts not in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in allowing the contributions to the Pension Fund for which no effective arrangements for deduction of tax from payment out of it were made as required under section 10(4)(c) of the Income‑tax Act, 1922?" We have noticed that in a recent judgment given by this Bench on 4‑4‑1984 in I.T.R. No. 116 of 1974, I.T.R. No. 117 of 1974 and I.T.R. No. 118 of 1974 (The Commissioner of Income‑tax, Central Zone, Karachi v. Messrs Pakistan Refinery Limited Karachi) we 'have decided the identical point by recasting the question. We recast the above‑quoted question as follows as in the present form, it seems to be presumptions "Where on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in allowing the contributions to the pension fund for which no effective arrangements for deduction of taxi from payment out of it were made as required under section 10(4)(a) of the income‑tax Act, 1922?" For the reasons 'already recorded in the 'above judgment dated 4‑4‑1984, our answer to the above question is in the affirmative. However there will be no order as to costs. M.B.A. Reference answered in affirmative.