2002 PLP 1874 (PTD)
COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE TAX, WATER COMPANIES ZONE III, LAHORE Versus Messrs STATE LIFE and others
| Citation | 2002 PLP 1874 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | Naseem Sikandar and Muhammad Sair Ali, JJ |
| Parties | COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE TAX, WATER COMPANIES ZONE III, LAHORE Versus Messrs STATE LIFE and others |
| Primary Law | Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PLP 1874 (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2002 PLP 1874 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore High Court bench comprising: Naseem Sikandar and Muhammad Sair Ali, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 1874 (PTD) (COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE TAX, WATER COMPANIES ZONE III, LAHORE Versus Messrs STATE LIFE and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S.136(2)
Revenue instead of approaching High Court under the provisions of S.136(2) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 as the same existed before 1-7-1997, had opted to file appeal under the amended provisions which came into force oh 1-7-1997
At that time when the order of the Tribunal was recorded, High Court exercised referable jurisdiction
High Court declined to entertain the appeal filed by Revenue which was dismissed it, circumstances. Muhammad Ilyas Khan for Revenue.
Judgment & Decree
S.136(2)
Revenue instead of approaching High Court under the provisions of S.136(2) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 as the same existed before 1-7-1997, had opted to file appeal under the amended provisions which came into force oh 1-7-1997
At that time when the order of the Tribunal was recorded, High Court exercised referable jurisdiction
High Court declined to entertain the appeal filed by Revenue which was dismissed it, circumstances. Muhammad Ilyas Khan for Revenue. Heard.
2. The appeal pf the assessee-respondent was decided by the learned Tribunal on 23-2-1997 while the reference application proposing two questions were rejected by them on 19-1-1998: Thereafter, the Revenue instead of approaching us under the provisions of section 136(2 as these existed before 1-7-1997 has opted to file an appeal under the amended provisions of which came into force on 1-7-1997.
3. Since at the relevant time when the order of the Tribunal was recorded, this Court exercised referable jurisdiction, appeal filed by the Revenue cannot be entertained.
4. Dismissed. Q.M.H./M.A.K./C-155/L Appeal dismissed.