1990 PLP 840 (PTD)
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME‑TAX, LAHORE Versus Messrs ELECTRO CABLE INDUSTRIES, LAHORE and others
| Citation | 1990 PLP 840 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Dorab Patel and Nasim Hasan Shah, JJ |
| Parties | COMMISSIONER OF INCOME‑TAX, LAHORE Versus Messrs ELECTRO CABLE INDUSTRIES, LAHORE and others |
| Primary Law | Income‑tax Act (XI of 1922)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 840 (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 1990 PLP 840 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Dorab Patel and Nasim Hasan Shah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 840 (PTD) (COMMISSIONER OF INCOME‑TAX, LAHORE Versus Messrs ELECTRO CABLE INDUSTRIES, LAHORE and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- S. Abdul Haque, Senior Advocate, Sh. Riazul Haq, Advocate and Iftikharudin, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 2nd March, 1980.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court dated 14‑5‑1973, 18‑10‑1973, 24‑9‑1974, 16‑9‑1974 and 23‑9‑1974 in T.R. 31/72, T.R. 91/73. T.R. 92/73, T.R. 170/74, 171/74, 204/74, 205/74, 200/74, 156/74, 182/74, T.R. 11/74 and in 229/74 respectively). ‑‑‑‑S. 26‑A‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Leave to appeal‑‑ Question involved was of proper interpretation of S. 26‑A, Income‑tax Act, 1922 with particular reference to the right of a firm to obtain renewal of its registration under that section‑‑‑All the judgments assailed herein were based on an earlier judgment of High Court in which Supreme Court had granted leave and these petitions also had raised the same question of limitation as was raised in that petition wherein Supreme Court had granted leave to appeal‑‑‑Leave to appeal was thus granted in all the cases on the same terms and conditions as had been granted in the earlier case referred to.
Judgment & Decree
DORAB PATEL, J.‑‑‑All these petitions have been filed against reference under section 66(1) of the Income‑tax Act, 1922, which have been decided by the learned Judges of the Lahore High Court against the petitioner. The question in all these cases is of the proper interpretation of section 26‑A of the Income‑tax Act, 1922 with particular reference to the right of a firm to obtain a renewal of its registration under that section. Learned counsel stated that all the impugned judgments were based on an earlier judgment of the Lahore High Court in the Commissioner of Income‑tax v. Messrs Rippon Printing Press (Civil Reference No. 65 of 1967) in which we had granted leave and that these petitions also raise the same question of limitation as is raised in the Rippon Printing Press's case. Accordingly we grant leave in all these cases on the same terms and conditions as in Rippon Printing Press's case. The appeals will be made ready on the present record with liberty to the parties to file additional documents, and will be put up for hearing with the appeal arising out of C.P.S.L.A. No. 876 of 1976 (The Commissioner of Income -tax, Lahore v. Messrs Rippon Printing Press) and the connected appeals. A.A./C‑57/S Leave granted.