2023 PLP (Trib (PTD)
Messrs EMIRATES SUPPLY CHAIN SERVICES (PVT.) LTD., LAHORE Versus The COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, CRTO, LAHORE
| Citation | 2023 PLP (Trib (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Inland Revenue Appellate Tribunal |
| Bench Members | Mian Tauqeer Aslam, Judicial Member and Muhammad Azam, Accountant Member |
| Parties | Messrs EMIRATES SUPPLY CHAIN SERVICES (PVT.) LTD., LAHORE Versus The COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, CRTO, LAHORE |
| Primary Law | (a) Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001), (b) Words and phrases |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2023 PLP (Trib (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: (a) Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001), (b) Words and phrases as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2023 PLP (Trib (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Inland Revenue Appellate Tribunal bench comprising: Mian Tauqeer Aslam, Judicial Member and Muhammad Azam, Accountant Member.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2023 PLP (Trib (PTD) (Messrs EMIRATES SUPPLY CHAIN SERVICES (PVT.) LTD., LAHORE Versus The COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, CRTO, LAHORE). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Aman Ullah Virk, DR for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
S.131
Appeal to the Appellate Tribunal
Scope
Appellant/assessee sought stay of proceedings in consequence of an order passed by Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals)
Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals) had annulled the order of the assessing officer, therefore, no demand existed against the appellant/assessee
Department could only proceed afresh if the facts of the case and legal provisions so warranted
Request for granting stay of proceedings was not allowed.
"Annulment"
Defined. Shahbaz Butt for Applicant.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AZAM, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER.
Titled miscellaneous application has been filed at the instance of the applicant-registered person seeking stay of proceedings in compliance to directions contained in the Order of the learned Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals-II), Lahore dated 14.01.2020. The A.R. argued that the directions of the CIR(A) will cause hardships and irreparable loss if the stay is not granted. On the contrary, the learned D.R strongly opposed the contentions of the learned A.R for granting the stay in the instant application.
2. We have heard the argument advanced by the rival parties. It is noted that the appellant is requesting for stay of proceeding with reference to the judgement of the CIR(A-II) contained in Order No.42 dated 14.01.2020. The perusal of the said order reveals that the commissioner (Appeals) has annulled the order of the assessing officer by holding as under:-- "In view of these facts, the impugned order is not sustainable in law, hence annulled".
3. In the Black Law Dictionary (8th Edition) the annulment of judgment is defined as under:- A retrospective obliteration of a judicial decision, having the effect of restoring the parties to their pretrial position. Types of annulment include reversal and vacation.
4. In the instant case the order of the assessing officer was declared ovoid by the CIR (A) concerned. Therefore, there exists no demand or proceedings against the taxpayer with reference to the order passed by the assessing officer to cause any hardship or grievance. The department can only proceed afresh if the facts and legal provisions warrants. Hence, under the circumstances there is no prima facie case to justify a restraining order. Accordingly, the request for granting stay of proceedings in the instant case is not allowed. However, this will not cause prejudice to the main appeal of the taxpayer. Order accordingly. SA/25/Tax (Trib) Application dismissed.