1985 PLP 515 (PTD)
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME‑TAX, WEST ZONE, KARACHI Versus MESSRS SIND LAND DEVELOPMENT LTD., MIRPUR KHAS
| Citation | 1985 PLP 515 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi High Court |
| Bench Members | Ajmal Mian and Tanzil‑ur‑Rehman, JJ |
| Parties | THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME‑TAX, WEST ZONE, KARACHI Versus MESSRS SIND LAND DEVELOPMENT LTD., MIRPUR KHAS |
| Primary Law | Income‑tax Act (XI of 1922)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 PLP 515 (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 1985 PLP 515 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi High Court bench comprising: Ajmal Mian and Tanzil‑ur‑Rehman, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 PLP 515 (PTD) (THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME‑TAX, WEST ZONE, KARACHI Versus MESSRS SIND LAND DEVELOPMENT LTD., MIRPUR KHAS). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Iqbal Kazi for Respondent.
- Date of hearing : 26th November, 1984.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑ Ss. 46(1) & 66(1)‑Recovery of tax‑Default in payment‑Imposition of penalty‑Department imposing penalty on assessee under S. 46(I) of Act‑Tribunal vacating such order in appeal Direct reference by Department under S. 66(1) of Act‑Held, Tribunal was justified in vacating the order of penalty passed by Income‑tax Officer in circumstances of case. . Messrs Bawdni Violen Textile Mills v. Commissioner of Income‑tax P L D 1967 Kar. 688; The Commissioner of Income‑tax, Rawaldindi Zone, Rawalpindi v. Begum Mumtaz Jamal 1976 P T D 182; Commissioner of Income‑tax, Karachi (East), Karachi v. Azam Industries Ltd., Karachi 1980 P T D 26 and Commissioner of Income‑tax, Lahore v. Zamir and Sons, Lahore 1981 P T D 137 fol. Shaikh Haider for Applicant,
Judgment & Decree
Shaikh Haider for Applicant, Iqbal Kazi for Respondent. Date of hearing : 26th November, 1984. AJMAL MIAN J.‑These are direct income‑tax references under sec tion 66(1) of the Income‑tax Act, 1922 between the same parties, pertaining to the assessment years 1969‑70, 1970‑71 and 1971‑72 and raise the follow ing question of law :‑ "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in vacating the order of penalty passed by the Income‑tax Officer under section 46(I) of the Income‑tax Act, 1922.? Learned counsel for the parties point out that the above‑quoted question is covered by a number of judgments of the High Courts as well as one judgment of the Supreme Court. Reference may be made in this regard to the case of Messrs Bawani Violen Textile Mills v. Commissioner of Income‑tax (P L D 1967 Kar.688), The Commissioner of Income‑tax, Rawalpindi Zone, Rawalpindi v. Begum Mumtaz Jamal () 1976 P T D 182), Commissioner of Income‑tax,Karachi (East), Karachi v. Azam Industries Ltd., Karachi (1980 P T D 26) and Commis sioner of Income‑tax, Lahore v. Zamir and Sons, Lahore (1981 P T D, 137). In addition to the above cases there have been a number of judg ments given by various Division Benches of this Court including this Bench. We see no reason to take different view in the above matters, and therefore, our answer to the above question is in the affirmative. There will be no order as to costs. M. B. A. Question answered in the affirmative.