ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
C. P. No. D – 6682 of 2020
|
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
FRESH CASE
1. For orders on Misc. No.28515/2020.
2. For orders on Misc. No.28516/2020.
3. For orders on Misc. No.28517/2020.
4. For hearing of Main Case.
24.12.2020:
Mr. Jam Zeeshan, Advocate for Petitioner.
------
1. Urgency granted.
2. Exemption granted subject to all just exceptions.
3-4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is an industrial unit, engaged in business of exploration of petroleum products and has imported plant and machinery for installation in the industrial unit, and claimed tax credit for investment in terms of Section 65(B) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, as it stood on 30th June 2018. According to learned counsel, petitioner has already made investment and purchased the machinery pursuant to aforesaid un-amended statutory provisions as stood as on 30.06.2018, however, through Finance Act, 2019, an amendment has been made in sub-section (1), whereby, proviso has been added to the effect that “provided that for the tax year 2019 the rate of credit shall be equal to five percent of the amount so invested”, whereas, in sub-section (2) of Section 65(B), another amendment has been made, whereby, period upto June 2021 has been reduced to June 2019, whereas, respondents intend to apply such amendment retrospectively even in cases where such investment has already been made. Per learned counsel, through retrospective application, the right accrued in favour of the petitioner, who made investment on the basis of prevailing statutory provision, has been withdrawn retrospectively. According to learned counsel, the impugned amendment and its retrospective application in this regard is ultra-vires to the Constitution and the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Molasses Trading & Export (Pvt.) Limited v. Federation of Pakistan & others [1993 SCMR 1905] and also the case of Gulshan Spinning Mills Ltd. & others v. Government of Pakistan & others [2005 PTD 259].
It has been further contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is under legal obligation to furnish its Return by 31st December 2020 as per law as it existed prior to impugned amendments to be applied prospectively, however, e-portal/computer system of respondents is not accepting 10% tax credit under Section 65(B) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, therefore, requests that petitioner may be allowed to submit Returns Manually as per un-amended provision of Section 65(B) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 to avoid any default and penal action by the department, whereas, in case the petitioner does not succeed in the instant petition, the amount [10%] will be paid by the petitioner within fifteen days from the date of an adverse order by this Court in the instant petition, however, subject to right of appeal. In support of his contentions, learned counsel has placed on record a copy of order dated 23.12.2020 passed by this Court in C.P. No.D-6583/2020 in the case of (Re: M/s. NOVATEX Limited v. Federation of Pakistan and others).
Let pre-admission notice be issued to the respondents as well as Attorney General of Pakistan in terms of Order XXVII A CPC, to be served through first three modes, for a date to be fixed after four weeks’ when instant petition may be taken up alongwith C.P.Nos.D-8233/2019 & 6583/2020 & other connected petitions on the subject, whereas, comments, if any, shall be filed with advance copy to learned counsel for the petitioner. In the meanwhile, petitioner may be allowed to submit its Returns Manually or by making adjustment in e-portal/computer system as provisional interim arrangement, as per un-amended provisions of Section 65(B) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 [prior to amendment through Finance Act, 2019]. However, till next date, no adverse action may be taken against the petitioner in respect of subject controversy.
J U D G E
J U D G E
A.S/F.A.
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
I.T.R.A. No. 01 of 2018
|
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
Fresh Case
1. For orders on office objection No. 21.
2. For orders on Misc. No. 10/2018
3. For hearing of Main Case.
Mr. Hussain Idrees, advocate holding brief on behalf of Mr. Raheel Kamran Shaikh, advocate for the applicant, who could not reach from Lahore on account of some personal exigency and requests for adjournment.
Adjourned, to come up after four weeks.
J U D G E
J U D G E
A.S
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
I.T.R.A. No. 391 of 2018
I.T.R.A. No. 392 of 2018
I.T.R.A. No. 393 of 2018
I.T.R.A. No. 394 of 2018
I.T.R.A. No. 395 of 2018
I.T.R.A. No. 396 of 2018
|
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
Fresh Case
Mr. Hussain Idrees, advocate holding brief on behalf of Mr. Raheel Kamran Shaikh, advocate for the applicant(s), who could not reach from Lahore on account of some personal exigency and requests for adjournment.
Adjourned, to come up after four weeks.
J U D G E
J U D G E
A.S
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
C. P. No. D – 6630 of 2020
|
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
FRESH CASE
1. For orders on Misc. No.28357/2020.
2. For orders on Misc. No.28358/2020.
3. For hearing of Main Case.
4. For orders on Misc. No.28359/2020.
23.12.2020:
Mr. Atir Aqeel Ansari, advocates for the petitioner.
--------
1. Granted.
2. Granted subject to all just exceptions.
3-4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is providing terminal operating services and makes payments under Sindh Sales Tax on Service Act, 2011, under the entry No.9819.9090 of the Second Schedule to the Sindh Sales Tax on Service Act, 2011, however, the Assistant Commissioner-IR, E & C Unit-3, Zone-V, L.T.U. Karachi, has issued Show Cause Notice dated 05.03.2019 under Section 14(1) of Federal Excise Duty Act, 2005, requiring the petitioner to make payment of Federal Excise duty @ 16% for the period November 2015 to June 2016. Per learned counsel, a Divisional Bench of this Court in the case of Pakistan International Freight of Forwarders Association through General Secretary v. Province of Sindh through Secretary and another [2017 PTD 1], has already been pleased to declare similar Notices as illegal and without lawful authority, whereas, according to learned counsel, after 18th Amendment, the Federal Government is not authorized to charge tax on such services from the petitioner. It has been further contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in similar petitions, including C.P.No.D-1700/2019 and several others are also pending before this Court, wherein, notices have been issued to the respondents, who were restrained from passing final order pursuant to impugned Show Cause Notice. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that similar Notices were issued to the petitioner for the period from July 2017 to June 2018 against which, petitioner has filed a constitutional petition being C.P.No.D-2185/2019, wherein, Notices have been issued vide order dated 03.04.2019 to the respondents, who have been restrained from passing any final adverse order against the petitioner. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to order dated 03.04.2019 passed by this Court in the aforesaid petition, copy of which is available at Page: 33 as Annexure ‘E’ of instant file, hence prays accordingly.
Let pre-admission notice be issued to the Respondents as well as D.A.G. and A.A.G. to be served through first three modes for a date to be fixed after four weeks’, when instant petition may be taken up alongwith aforesaid and other connected petitions, whereas, comments, if any, shall be filed with advance copy to the learned counsel for the Petitioner. In the meanwhile, petitioner may submit response to impugned Show Cause Notice dated 20.11.2020 by raising all such factual and legal objections, however, no final adverse order shall be passed against the petitioner pursuant to impugned Show Cause Notice till the next date of hearing.
J U D G E
J U D G E
A.S
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
C. P. No. D – 6640 of 2020
|
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
Fresh Case
1. For orders on Misc. No. 28365/2020.
2. For orders on Misc. No. 28366/2020.
3. For hearing of Main Case.
4. For orders on Misc. No. 28367/2020.
Mr. Muhammad Fahim Khanzada, advocate for petitioner.
--------
1. Granted.
2. Granted subject to all just legal exceptions.
3-4. Through instant petition, petitioner has impugned the Show Cause Notice dated 04.12.2020 under Section 11(2) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 for the period from July 2013 to June 2014 issued by the respondents for being time-barred as according to learned counsel for the petitioner, the limitation to issue a Notice as provided under Section 11(5) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 is six [6] years’. Per learned counsel, this issue has already been decided in favour of the petitioners vide judgment dated 09.01.2017 passed by the Lahore High Court in W.P.No. 32597/2015 [Re: Nestle Pakistan Limited etc. v. the Federal Board of Revenue etc.] and several other connected petition, copy of such judgment is available at Page: 79 – 149 as Annexure ‘E’ of instant file.
Let pre-admission notice be issued to the Respondents as well as D.A.G., to be served through first three modes for a date to be fixed after four weeks’, when instant petition may be taken up alongwith other identical petitions pending before this Court on the subject, whose numbers will be provided by the learned counsel for the petitioner, whereas, comments, if any, shall be filed with advance copy to the learned counsel for the Petitioner, however, no final adverse order shall be passed against the petitioner pursuant to impugned Show Cause Notice till the next date of hearing.
J U D G E
J U D G E
A.S.
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
C. P. No. D – 6627 of 2020
|
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
Fresh Case
1. For orders on Misc. No. 28322/2020.
2. For orders on Misc. No. 28323/2020.
3. For hearing of Main Case.
4. For orders on Misc. No. 28324/2020.
Mr. Muhammad Anas Makhdoom, advocate for petitioner.
--------
1. Granted.
2. Granted subject to all just legal exceptions.
3-4. Through instant petition, petitioner has impugned order dated 02.12.2020 passed by the Chief Commissioner, Inland Revenue, LTU, Karachi, under Section 122B of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 for the Tax Year 2019, whereby, according to learned counsel, request for issuance of exemption certificate from payment of advance tax at the time of imports has been declined, inspite of the fact, that one of the condition of SRO 947 of 2008 i.e. (or the taxpayer shall not be liable to claim brought forward losses or depreciation) was attracted in the case of the petitioner. According to learned counsel, claim of the petitioner has been declined on the basis of adverse comments received from concerned Commissioner, who has observed that claim of petitioner for brought forward losses/depreciation is without lawful authority. Per learned counsel, there is no remedy available to the petitioner against the impugned order except to file petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the subject controversy is already pending before this Court in number of petitions, including C.P.No.D-2360/2019 filed by the present petitioner and several other petitions, wherein, Notices have been issued to the respondents, who have been directed not to take any adverse action against the petitioner, including encashment of the bank guarantee submitted by the petitioner, submitted by the petitioner before the concerned Collectorate, while seeking provisional release of the consignment. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to order dated 09.04.2019 passed by this Court in the aforementioned petition, copy of which is available at Page: 221-223 as Annexure ‘J’ of instant file, hence prays accordingly.
Let pre-admission notice be issued to the respondents as well as DAG, to be served through first three modes for a date to be fixed after four weeks’, when instant petition may be taken up alongwith aforesaid and other connected petitions, whereas, comments shall be filed with advance copy to learned counsel for the petitioner. In the meanwhile, interim order passed in the aforesaid petition shall apply mutatis mutandis in the instant petition as well.
J U D G E
J U D G E
A.S
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
C. P. No. D – 6623 of 2020
|
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
Fresh Case
1. For orders on Misc. No. 28315/2020.
2. For orders on Misc. No. 28316/2020.
3. For hearing of Main Case.
4. For orders on Misc. No. 28317/2020.
Mr. Ijaz Ahmed, advocate for the petitioner.
--------
1. Granted.
2. Granted subject to all just legal exceptions.
3-4. Learned Counsel submits that pursuant to order passed under Section 122(5A) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 for the Tax Year 2017, petitioner has filed appeal alongwith stay application before Commissioner (Appeals-IV), LTU-II, Inland Revenue, Karachi, however, no order has been passed thereon, whereas, respondents intend to initiate recovery proceedings by adopting coercive measures, including attachment of bank account(s) of the petitioner, hence requests that respondents may be restrained from enforcing the recovery of the impugned demand, till final decision of the appeal pending before Commissioner (Appeals) in terms of earlier orders passed by this Court in similar petitions.
Let pre-admission notice be issued to the respondents as well as DAG to be served through first three modes for 19.01.2021, when comments, if any, shall be filed with advance copy to learned counsel for petitioner. However, till next date, respondents shall not enforce the recovery of the impugned demand, which is subject matter of appeal before Commissioner (Appeals-IV) Inland Revenue in the instant matter.
J U D G E
J U D G E
A.S.
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
C. P. No. D – 6583 of 2020
|
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
FRESH CASE
5. For orders on Misc. No.28199/2020.
6. For orders on Misc. No.28200/2020.
7. For orders on Misc. No.28201/2020.
8. For hearing of Main Case.
23.12.2020:
Mr. Abid H. Shaban, advocate for the petitioner
------
1. Granted.
2. Granted Subject to all just exceptions.
3-4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is an industrial unit, engaged in business of manufacturing PET resin, and has imported plant and machinery for installation in the industrial unit, and claimed tax credit for investment in terms of Section 65(B) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, as it stood on 30th June 2018. According to learned counsel, petitioner has already made investment and purchased the machinery pursuant to aforesaid un-amended statutory provisions as stood as on 30.06.2018, however, through Finance Act, 2019, an amendment has been made in sub-section (1), whereby, proviso has been added to the effect that “provided that for the tax year 2019 the rate of credit shall be equal to five percent of the amount so invested”, whereas, in sub-section (2) of Section 65(B), another amendment has been made, whereby, period upto June 2021 has been reduced to June 2019, whereas, respondents intend to apply such amendment retrospectively even in cases where such investment has already been made. Per learned counsel, through retrospective application, the right accrued in favour of the petitioner, who made investment on the basis of prevailing statutory provision, has been withdrawn retrospectively. According to learned counsel, the impugned amendment and its retrospective application in this regard is ultra-vires to the Constitution and the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Molasses Trading & Export (Pvt.) Limited v. Federation of Pakistan & others [1993 SCMR 1905] and also the case of Gulshan Spinning Mills Ltd. & others v. Government of Pakistan & others [2005 PTD 259].
It has been further contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is under legal obligation to furnish its Return by 31st December 2020 as per law as it existed prior to impugned amendments to be applied prospectively, however, e-portal/computer system of respondents is not accepting 10% tax credit under Section 65(B) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, therefore, requests that petitioner may be allowed to submit Returns Manually as per un-amended provision of Section 65(B) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 to avoid any default and penal action by the department, whereas, in case the petitioner does not succeed in the instant petition, the amount [10%] will be paid by the petitioner within fifteen days from the date of an adverse order by this Court in the instant petition, however, subject to right of appeal.
Let pre-admission notice be issued to the respondents as well as Attorney General of Pakistan in terms of Order XXVII A CPC, to be served through first three modes for a date to be fixed after four weeks’ alongwith C.P.No.D-8233/2019 & other connected petitions on the subject, when comments, if any, shall be filed with advance copy to learned counsel for the petitioner. In the meanwhile, petitioner may be allowed to submit its Returns Manually or by making adjustment in e-portal/computer system as provisional interim arrangement, as per un-amended provisions of Section 65(B) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 [prior to amendment through Finance Act, 2019]. However, till next date, no adverse action may be taken against the petitioner in respect of subject controversy.
J U D G E
J U D G E
A.S.
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
C. P. No. D – 6582 of 2020
|
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
FRESH CASE
1. For orders on Misc. No.28196/2020.
2. For orders on Misc. No.28197/2020.
3. For orders on Misc. No.28198/2020.
4. For hearing of Main Case.
23.12.2020:
Mr. Abid H. Shaban, advocate for the petitioner
------
1. Granted.
2. Granted Subject to all just exceptions.
3-4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is an industrial unit, engaged in business of manufacturing polyester polymer and PET resin, and has imported plant and machinery for installation in the industrial unit, and claimed tax credit for investment in terms of Section 65(B) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, as it stood on 30th June 2018. According to learned counsel, petitioner has already made investment and purchased the machinery pursuant to aforesaid un-amended statutory provisions as stood as on 30.06.2018, however, through Finance Act, 2019, an amendment has been made in sub-section (1), whereby, proviso has been added to the effect that “provided that for the tax year 2019 the rate of credit shall be equal to five percent of the amount so invested”, whereas, in sub-section (2) of Section 65(B), another amendment has been made, whereby, period upto June 2021 has been reduced to June 2019, whereas, respondents intend to apply such amendment retrospectively even in cases where such investment has already been made. Per learned counsel, through retrospective application, the right accrued in favour of the petitioner, who made investment on the basis of prevailing statutory provision, has been withdrawn retrospectively. According to learned counsel, the impugned amendment and its retrospective application in this regard is ultra-vires to the Constitution and the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Molasses Trading & Export (Pvt.) Limited v. Federation of Pakistan & others [1993 SCMR 1905] and also the case of Gulshan Spinning Mills Ltd. & others v. Government of Pakistan & others [2005 PTD 259].
It has been further contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is under legal obligation to furnish its Return by 31st December 2020 as per law as it existed prior to impugned amendments to be applied prospectively, however, e-portal/computer system of respondents is not accepting 10% tax credit under Section 65(B) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, therefore, requests that petitioner may be allowed to submit Returns Manually as per un-amended provision of Section 65(B) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 to avoid any default and penal action by the department, whereas, in case the petitioner does not succeed in the instant petition, the amount [10%] will be paid by the petitioner within fifteen days from the date of an adverse order by this Court in the instant petition, however, subject to right of appeal.
Let pre-admission notice be issued to the respondents as well as Attorney General of Pakistan in terms of Order XXVII A CPC, to be served through first three modes for a date to be fixed after four weeks’ alongwith C.P.No.D-8233/2019 & other connected petitions on the subject, when comments, if any, shall be filed with advance copy to learned counsel for the petitioner. In the meanwhile, petitioner may be allowed to submit its Returns Manually or by making adjustment in e-portal/computer system as provisional interim arrangement, as per un-amended provisions of Section 65(B) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 [prior to amendment through Finance Act, 2019]. However, till next date, no adverse action may be taken against the petitioner in respect of subject controversy.
J U D G E
J U D G E
A.S.
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
C. P. No. D – 6632 of 2020
|
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
Fresh Case
1. For orders on Misc. No. 28334/2020.
2. For orders on Misc. No. 28335/2020.
3. For hearing of Main Case.
4. For orders on Misc. No. 28336/2020.
Mr. Ali Almani, advocate for the petitioner.
--------
1. Granted.
2. Granted subject to all just legal exceptions.
3-4. Through instant petition, petitioner has impugned letter dated 02.12.2020 issued by the Secretary (IR-Operations), FBR, Islamabad, addressed to the Chief Commissioner-IR, Large Taxpayer Office, Karachi, in respect of petitioner’s case, whereby, according to learned counsel for the petitioner, under purported exercise of jurisdiction under Section 214A of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, the Chief Commissioner, Large Taxpayer Office, Karachi has been authorized to pass an order of rectification under Section 221 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, by extending the period limitation of five years upto 31.12.2020, however, without assigning any reason, which according to learned counsel for the petitioner, is the requirement of law. Per learned counsel, similar controversy is already pending before this Court in number of petitions, including C.P.No.D-6201/2020 [Re: National Bank of Pakistan v. Federation of Pakistan through Ministry of Finance & others], wherein, Notices have been issued to the respondents vide order dated 07.12.2020, who have been restrained from passing any final adverse order. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to order dated 07.12.2020 passed by this Court in the aforesaid petition, copy of which is available at Page: 123 – 125 as Annexure ‘E’ of instant file, hence prays accordingly.
Let pre-admission notice be issued to the respondents as well as DAG, to be served through first three modes for a date to be fixed after four weeks’, when instant petition may be taken up alongwith aforesaid and other connected petitions, whereas, comments shall be filed with advance copy to learned counsel for the petitioner. In the meanwhile, interim order passed in the aforesaid petition shall apply mutatis mutandis in the instant petition as well.
J U D G E
J U D G E
A.S
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
C. P. No. D – 6633 of 2020
|
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
Fresh Case
1. For orders on Misc. No. 28338/2020.
2. For orders on Misc. No. 28339/2020.
3. For hearing of Main Case.
4. For orders on Misc. No. 28340/2020.
Mr. Ali Almani, advocate for the petitioner.
--------
1. Granted.
2. Granted subject to all just legal exceptions.
3-4. Through instant petition, petitioner has impugned letter dated 02.12.2020 issued by the Secretary (IR-Operations), FBR, Islamabad, addressed to the Chief Commissioner-IR, Large Taxpayer Office, Karachi, in respect of petitioner’s case, whereby, according to learned counsel for the petitioner, under purported exercise of jurisdiction under Section 214A of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, the Chief Commissioner, Large Taxpayer Office, Karachi has been authorized to pass an order of rectification under Section 221 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, by extending the period limitation of five years upto 31.12.2020, however, without assigning any reason, which according to learned counsel for the petitioner, is the requirement of law. Per learned counsel, similar controversy is already pending before this Court in number of petitions, including C.P.No.D-6201/2020 [Re: National Bank of Pakistan v. Federation of Pakistan through Ministry of Finance & others], wherein, Notices have been issued to the respondents vide order dated 07.12.2020, who have been restrained from passing any final adverse order. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to order dated 07.12.2020 passed by this Court in the aforesaid petition, copy of which is available at Page: 241 – 243 as Annexure ‘E’ of instant file, hence prays accordingly.
Let pre-admission notice be issued to the respondents as well as DAG, to be served through first three modes for a date to be fixed after four weeks’, when instant petition may be taken up alongwith aforesaid and other connected petitions, whereas, comments shall be filed with advance copy to learned counsel for the petitioner. In the meanwhile, interim order passed in the aforesaid petition shall apply mutatis mutandis in the instant petition as well.
J U D G E
J U D G E
A.S
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
C. P. No. D – 6634 of 2020
|
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
Fresh Case
1. For orders on Misc. No. 28341/2020.
2. For orders on Misc. No. 28342/2020.
3. For hearing of Main Case.
4. For orders on Misc. No. 28343/2020.
Mr. Ali Almani, advocate for the petitioner.
--------
1. Granted.
2. Granted subject to all just legal exceptions.
3-4. Through instant petition, petitioner has impugned letter dated 02.12.2020 issued by the Secretary (IR-Operations), FBR, Islamabad, addressed to the Chief Commissioner-IR, Large Taxpayer Office, Karachi, in respect of petitioner’s case, whereby, according to learned counsel for the petitioner, under purported exercise of jurisdiction under Section 214A of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, the Chief Commissioner, Large Taxpayer Office, Karachi has been authorized to pass an order of rectification under Section 221 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, by extending the period limitation of five years upto 31.12.2020, however, without assigning any reason, which according to learned counsel for the petitioner, is the requirement of law. Per learned counsel, similar controversy is already pending before this Court in number of petitions, including C.P.No.D-6201/2020 [Re: National Bank of Pakistan v. Federation of Pakistan through Ministry of Finance & others], wherein, Notices have been issued to the respondents vide order dated 07.12.2020, who have been restrained from passing any final adverse order. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to order dated 07.12.2020 passed by this Court in the aforesaid petition, copy of which is available at Page: 55 – 57 as Annexure ‘E’ of instant file, hence prays accordingly.
Let pre-admission notice be issued to the respondents as well as DAG, to be served through first three modes for a date to be fixed after four weeks’, when instant petition may be taken up alongwith aforesaid and other connected petitions, whereas, comments shall be filed with advance copy to learned counsel for the petitioner. In the meanwhile, interim order passed in the aforesaid petition shall apply mutatis mutandis in the instant petition as well.
J U D G E
J U D G E
A.S
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
C. P. No. D – 6635 of 2020
|
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
Fresh Case
1. For orders on Misc. No. 28344/2020.
2. For orders on Misc. No. 28345/2020.
3. For hearing of Main Case.
4. For orders on Misc. No. 28346/2020.
Mr. Ali Almani, advocate for the petitioner.
--------
1. Granted.
2. Granted subject to all just legal exceptions.
3-4. Through instant petition, petitioner has impugned letter dated 02.12.2020 issued by the Secretary (IR-Operations), FBR, Islamabad, addressed to the Chief Commissioner-IR, Large Taxpayer Office, Karachi, in respect of petitioner’s case, whereby, according to learned counsel for the petitioner, under purported exercise of jurisdiction under Section 214A of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, the Chief Commissioner, Large Taxpayer Office, Karachi has been authorized to pass an order of rectification under Section 221 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, by extending the period limitation of five years upto 31.12.2020, however, without assigning any reason, which according to learned counsel for the petitioner, is the requirement of law. Per learned counsel, similar controversy is already pending before this Court in number of petitions, including C.P.No.D-6201/2020 [Re: National Bank of Pakistan v. Federation of Pakistan through Ministry of Finance & others], wherein, Notices have been issued to the respondents vide order dated 07.12.2020, who have been restrained from passing any final adverse order. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to order dated 07.12.2020 passed by this Court in the aforesaid petition, copy of which is available at Page: 109 – 111 as Annexure ‘E’ of instant file, hence prays accordingly.
Let pre-admission notice be issued to the respondents as well as DAG, to be served through first three modes for a date to be fixed after four weeks’, when instant petition may be taken up alongwith aforesaid and other connected petitions, whereas, comments shall be filed with advance copy to learned counsel for the petitioner. In the meanwhile, interim order passed in the aforesaid petition shall apply mutatis mutandis in the instant petition as well.
J U D G E
J U D G E
A.S
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
C. P. No. D – 6636 of 2020
|
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
Fresh Case
1. For orders on Misc. No. 28347/2020.
2. For orders on Misc. No. 28348/2020.
3. For hearing of Main Case.
4. For orders on Misc. No. 28349/2020.
Mr. Ali Almani, advocate for the petitioner.
--------
1. Granted.
2. Granted subject to all just legal exceptions.
3-4. Through instant petition, petitioner has impugned letter dated 02.12.2020 issued by the Secretary (IR-Operations), FBR, Islamabad, addressed to the Chief Commissioner-IR, Large Taxpayer Office, Karachi, in respect of petitioner’s case, whereby, according to learned counsel for the petitioner, under purported exercise of jurisdiction under Section 214A of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, the Chief Commissioner, Large Taxpayer Office, Karachi has been authorized to pass an order of rectification under Section 221 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, by extending the period limitation of five years upto 31.12.2020, however, without assigning any reason, which according to learned counsel for the petitioner, is the requirement of law. Per learned counsel, similar controversy is already pending before this Court in number of petitions, including C.P.No.D-6201/2020 [Re: National Bank of Pakistan v. Federation of Pakistan through Ministry of Finance & others], wherein, Notices have been issued to the respondents vide order dated 07.12.2020, who have been restrained from passing any final adverse order. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to order dated 07.12.2020 passed by this Court in the aforesaid petition, copy of which is available at Page: 129 – 131 as Annexure ‘E’ of instant file, hence prays accordingly.
Let pre-admission notice be issued to the respondents as well as DAG, to be served through first three modes for a date to be fixed after four weeks’, when instant petition may be taken up alongwith aforesaid and other connected petitions, whereas, comments shall be filed with advance copy to learned counsel for the petitioner. In the meanwhile, interim order passed in the aforesaid petition shall apply mutatis mutandis in the instant petition as well.
J U D G E
J U D G E
A.S
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
C. P. No. D – 6637 of 2020
|
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
Fresh Case
1. For orders on Misc. No. 28350/2020.
2. For orders on Misc. No. 28351/2020.
3. For hearing of Main Case.
4. For orders on Misc. No. 28352/2020.
Mr. Ali Almani, advocate for the petitioner.
--------
1. Granted.
2. Granted subject to all just legal exceptions.
3-4. Through instant petition, petitioner has impugned letter dated 02.12.2020 issued by the Secretary (IR-Operations), FBR, Islamabad, addressed to the Chief Commissioner-IR, Large Taxpayer Office, Karachi, in respect of petitioner’s case, whereby, according to learned counsel for the petitioner, under purported exercise of jurisdiction under Section 214A of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, the Chief Commissioner, Large Taxpayer Office, Karachi has been authorized to pass an order of rectification under Section 221 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, by extending the period limitation of five years upto 31.12.2020, however, without assigning any reason, which according to learned counsel for the petitioner, is the requirement of law. Per learned counsel, similar controversy is already pending before this Court in number of petitions, including C.P.No.D-6201/2020 [Re: National Bank of Pakistan v. Federation of Pakistan through Ministry of Finance & others], wherein, Notices have been issued to the respondents vide order dated 07.12.2020, who have been restrained from passing any final adverse order. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to order dated 07.12.2020 passed by this Court in the aforesaid petition, copy of which is available at Page: 131 – 133 as Annexure ‘E’ of instant file, hence prays accordingly.
Let pre-admission notice be issued to the respondents as well as DAG, to be served through first three modes for a date to be fixed after four weeks’, when instant petition may be taken up alongwith aforesaid and other connected petitions, whereas, comments shall be filed with advance copy to learned counsel for the petitioner. In the meanwhile, interim order passed in the aforesaid petition shall apply mutatis mutandis in the instant petition as well.
J U D G E
J U D G E
A.S