2003 PLP 2834 (PTD)
BROTHERS TEXTILE MILLS LTD. Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary and 3 others
| Citation | 2003 PLP 2834 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | Nasim Sikandar, J |
| Parties | BROTHERS TEXTILE MILLS LTD. Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary and 3 others |
| Primary Law | Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 PLP 2834 (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 2003 PLP 2834 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore High Court bench comprising: Nasim Sikandar, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 PLP 2834 (PTD) (BROTHERS TEXTILE MILLS LTD. Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary and 3 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Irfan Ahmed Sheikh for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 129(2)‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199‑‑‑Constitutional petition‑‑‑Non‑entertainment of appeal without payment of 15% of demand raised in assessment order‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Petitioner was entitled to interim relief on account of huge additions made in its hand‑‑ Assessee/tax payer would be entitled to interim relief till matter stood decided at least by one appellate forum‑‑‑Refusing interim relief against original order would be travesty of justice and was likely to encourage raising of fabulous demands for extraneous reasons‑‑‑High Court allowed Constitutional petition with direction to Appellate Authority to entertain appeal without such payment. Muhammad Ilyas Khan for the Revenue.
Judgment & Decree
Irfan Ahmed Sheikh for Petitioner. Muhammad Ilyas Khan for the Revenue. The only grievance of the petitioner appears to be the non entertainment of appeal by the first appellate forum/CIT(Appeals), Lahore without payment of 15% of the demand raised.
2. The petitioner is a listed company and is engaged in yarn spinning. As against disclosed income of Rs.4,751,556 an assessment was framed at taxable income of Rs.73938314. In the process additions were made in production accounts, sale of waste, interest disposal of fixed assets and administrative expenses.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that being before the first appellate forum the assessee is entitled to an interim relief and that forcing him to pay 15 % of illegal demand will amount to denial of right of appeal.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the Revenue, I am inclined to agree.
5. The petitioner being before the first appellate forum appears entitled to an interim relief on account of huge additions made in its hand. In a number of recent judgments this Court has, observed that an assessee/tax payer is entitled to interim relief till the matter stands decided at least by one appellate forum. Refusing interim relief against an original order of a Revenue Officer would be travesty of justice and is likely to encourage raising of fabulous demands for extraneous reasons.
6. That being so this petition is allowed. The respondent/CIT (Appeals) will entertain the appeal of the petitioner without insisting upon the payment of 15% of the demand created by the impugned assessment order. S.A.K./B‑162/L Petition allowed.