2002 PLP 2545 (PTD)
GENERAL CABLES (PVT.) LIMITED Versus INCOME-TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE-7, ZONE-B, LAHORE
| Citation | 2002 PLP 2545 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | Jawwad S. Khawaja, J |
| Parties | GENERAL CABLES (PVT.) LIMITED Versus INCOME-TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE-7, ZONE-B, LAHORE |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan 1973 |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PLP 2545 (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan 1973 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2002 PLP 2545 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore High Court bench comprising: Jawwad S. Khawaja, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 2545 (PTD) (GENERAL CABLES (PVT.) LIMITED Versus INCOME-TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE-7, ZONE-B, LAHORE). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nemo for Petitioner.
- Muhammad Ilyas Khan with M. Safdar, A.C. Income-tax, Gujranwala for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
Art.199
Constitutional petition
Assessee was neither given any notice nor opportunity of hearing was given before raising of demand of income tax
Assessee was condemned unheard
Demand raised by the Revenue Authorities was not maintainable and the same was set aside
High Court did not preclude the Revenue Authorities from issuing a notice to the assessee and after giving opportunity of being heard to the assessee, make demand
Constitutional petition was allowed accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
Mr. M. Safdar, A.C has appeared for the Income Tax Department. He states that no notice or opportunity of hearing was given to General Cables (Pvt.) Limited, the petitioner herein, before a demand of Rs.1,07,73,374 was raised against it. He states that a demand was raised against the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner and notice was also given to WAPDA in respect of the aforesaid demand.
2. I have, in details, examined the contentions of the petitioner and have recorded the same in the order dated 1-3-2002. This order is in continuation of the aforesaid order, dated 1-3-2002. As a consequence of the submissions noted therein, it follows that the petitioner has been condemned unheard. The impugned demand, as such, cannot be sustained and is, therefore, set aside. This order, however, shall no prevent the Income Tax Department from issuing a notice to the petitioner and affording to the petitioner an opportunity of being heard before making a demand against the petitioner. Disposed of. Q.M.H./M.A.K./G-172/L Petition allowed.