Generalibus specialia derogant

No similarity of subject-matter between cls. (xii), (xiv), (xv) & (xvi) of S. 110(2) of the late Income-tax Act, 1922, said rule was not attracted

Tribunal was not justified in holding that the expenditures were inadmissible under S.23(1)(xviii) of the Income Tax Ordinance,. 1979

Reference was answered in the negative.

Appellant's failure to file any counter-affidavit/objection opposing application filed under S.34, Arbitration Act, 1940

During pendency of application Registrar High Court debarred respondent from filing written statement upon which he moved an application under 8.159 of Sindh Chief Court Rules for recalling the said order of the Registrar

Appellant could not be allowed at appellate stage to raise verbal contention that respondent's miscellaneous application under 8.159, Sindh Chief Court Rules amounted to taking steps in the proceedings

Suit was rightly stayed by Trial Court.

S. 10(2)(xii), (xiv), (xv) and (xvi)-Clause (xvi), of residuary nature-Scope wholly different from sums included in cls. (xii), (xiv) and (xv)-Interpretation of statutes-Special provision in statute excludes application of general provision of similar nature-Rule not attracted in interpretation of cl. (xvi)-Maxim: generalibus specialia derogant (things spec is derogate from things general).