1991 PLP 872 (PTD)
UMER FAROOQ SYED Versus COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, LAHORE, and 2 others
| Citation | 1991 PLP 872 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | Malik Muhammad Qayyum, J |
| Parties | UMER FAROOQ SYED Versus COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, LAHORE, and 2 others |
| Primary Law | Wealth Tax Act (XV of 1963) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PLP 872 (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Wealth Tax Act (XV of 1963) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 PLP 872 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore High Court bench comprising: Malik Muhammad Qayyum, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 PLP 872 (PTD) (UMER FAROOQ SYED Versus COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, LAHORE, and 2 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Aurangzeb Mirza for Petitioner.
- Muhammad Ilyas Khan for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 31
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), .Art. 199
Recovery of tax-- Constitutional petition
Appeals of assessee against impugned order of the Wealth Tax Officer were pending before Commissioner of Appeals
Contention that the appellate forum having no jurisdiction to grant any stay against the recovery of tax, the remedy of appeal was not an adequate remedy within the meaning of Art. 199 Constitution of Pakistan (1973) was repelled
Held, though there was no specific provision in the Wealth. Tax Act, 1963 enabling the Appellate Commissioner to stay the operation of the order impugned before him but the Appellate Authority had inherent power to grant interim relief
Constitutional petition therefore, was premature. Sindh Employees' Social Security Institution and another v. Adamjee Cotton Mills Ltd. PLD 1975 SC 32 and Molvi Muhammad Yaqub v. Chairman, Election Tribunal PLD 1976 SC 625 ref.
Judgment & Decree
Wealth Tax Act (XV of 1963)
S. 31
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), .Art. 199
Recovery of tax-- Constitutional petition
Appeals of assessee against impugned order of the Wealth Tax Officer were pending before Commissioner of Appeals
Contention that the appellate forum having no jurisdiction to grant any stay against the recovery of tax, the remedy of appeal was not an adequate remedy within the meaning of Art. 199 Constitution of Pakistan (1973) was repelled
Held, though there was no specific provision in the Wealth. Tax Act, 1963 enabling the Appellate Commissioner to stay the operation of the order impugned before him but the Appellate Authority had inherent power to grant interim relief
Constitutional petition therefore, was premature. Sindh Employees' Social Security Institution and another v. Adamjee Cotton Mills Ltd. PLD 1975 SC 32 and Molvi Muhammad Yaqub v. Chairman, Election Tribunal PLD 1976 SC 625 ref. Aurangzeb Mirza for Petitioner. Muhammad Ilyas Khan for Respondent. In the Constitutional petition filed by the petitioner, he himself stated that against the impugned order of the Wealth Tax Officer, he has filed appeals, which are pending before the Commissioner of Income-tax Appeals. There is no reason that why the Constitutional petition should have been filed without waiting for the decision of these appeals.
2. Mr. Aurangzeb Mirza, however, states that as the appellate forum has no jurisdiction to grant any stay against the recovery of tax, the remedy of appeal is not an adequate remedy within the meaning of Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. This contention is misconceived. Although there is no specific provision in the Wealth Tax Act enabling the Appellate Commissioner to stay the operation of the order impugned before him but it is now well-settled that the appellate authority has inherent power to grant interim relief. Reference may be made to judgment of the Supreme Court in Sindh Employees Social Security Institution and another v. Adamjee Cotton Mills Ltd. (P L D 1975 SC 32) and Molvi Muhammad Yaqub v. Chairman, Election Tribunal (P L D 1976 SC 625). This petition, at this stage, is premature. It is disposed of accordingly. M.B.A./U-63/L Petition dismissed