1992 PLP 29 (PTD)
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CENTRAL ZONE-C, KARACHI Versus D. M. BAMJEE
| Citation | 1992 PLP 29 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Mamoon Kazi and Salahuddin Mirza, JJ |
| Parties | COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CENTRAL ZONE-C, KARACHI Versus D. M. BAMJEE |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 PLP 29 (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1992 PLP 29 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Mamoon Kazi and Salahuddin Mirza, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 PLP 29 (PTD) (COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CENTRAL ZONE-C, KARACHI Versus D. M. BAMJEE). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Iqbal Naeem Pasha for Respondent.
Judgment & Decree
MAMOON KAZI, J: -- These two references both under section 136(2) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 raise the same questions for determination as in I.T.R. No.21 of 1984 just disposed of by us today. The questions referred to are as follows:-- "(a) Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in holding the application of the applicant as barred by time. (b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that wealth tax liability is admissible deduction under section 10(2)(xvi) or 12(2) of the Repealed Act, 1922." Since we have already determined the second question in accordance with the judgment of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Central Zone B' Karachi v. Zakia Siddiqui 1989 P T D 135 we answer the said question accordingly.
2. So far as the first question is concerned, Mr. Iqbal Naeem Pasha, learned counsel for the respondent concedes that the delay, if any, can be condoned by the Court. In view of the concession, the learned counsel agrees that the first question does not require to be answered by us. The reference is, therefore, disposed of accordingly. M.BA./C-232/K Order accordingly,