1989 PLP 1088 (PTD)
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus Messrs OSMAN TEXTILE MILLS Ltd.
| Citation | 1989 PLP 1088 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi High Court |
| Bench Members | Ajmal Mian and Ahmed Ali U. Kurshi, JJ |
| Parties | THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus Messrs OSMAN TEXTILE MILLS Ltd. |
| Primary Law | Income-tax Act (XI of 1922) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 1088 (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 1088 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi High Court bench comprising: Ajmal Mian and Ahmed Ali U. Kurshi, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 1088 (PTD) (THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus Messrs OSMAN TEXTILE MILLS Ltd.). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Iqbal Naeem Pasha, Rehanul Hassan Naqvi, Mazhar Jafri, Samiuddin, Sami AA.Sharif, Abdul Rauf, Ali Amjad and Abdul Wadood for Respondent.
- Date of hearing A 15th August, 1988.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 18-A (6) [as amended by Finance Act (L of 1973)--Additional Tax under S.18 A (6) can be charged for fifteen months only thereby applying the amendment of S,18-A (6) of-1973 retrospectively. Commissioner of Income-tax v. Olympia 1987 P T D 739 fol. Shaikh Haider, Waheed Farooqui, Nasrullah Awan and Mrs. Rashid Patel for Applicant. .
Judgment & Decree
AJMAL MIAN, J--(1) By this common judgment we intend to dispose of the above Income Tax References, which involve identical question of Law, which reads as follows:- "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in directing that additional Tax U/S. 18A (6) be charged for fifteen months only thereby applying the amendment of 18A(6) made in 1973, retrospectively?"
2. M/s. Shaikh Haider, Waheed Farooqui, Nasrullah-Awan and Mrs. Rashida Patel, Learned counsel for the applicant department, have submitted that the above cases are covered by inter alia the judgment in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax. v. Olympia reported in 1987 P T D 739, decided by a Division Bench of this Court and which judgment has been followed by the other Division Bench of this Court. However, they have further submitted that the department has filed petitions for leave to appeal in the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the Judgments of this Court, which are pending and, therefore, they request that the above cases may be adjourned. Whereas M/s. lqbal Naeem Pasha, Rahanul Hassan Naqvi, Mazhar Jafri, Samiuddin Sami, A.A. Sharif, A.Rauf and Ali Amjad holding brief for Mr. Ali Athar, have contended that since the judgments given by the Division Benches of this Court are binding on this Division Bench, the above cases may be disposed of in terms of those judgments.
3. We see no reason to adjourn the above cases. As far as this Court is concerned, the above question has already been decided. We therefore, would follow the above reported judgment and would answer the above question in the affirmative for the reasons accorded in the above cited judgment. However, there will be no order as to costs. M.Y.H./C-123/K Order accordingly.