COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/WEALTH TAX versus ASLAM KHAN MOTOR WORKSHOP
Sections 132, 131, 2 (13), 2 (13A) and 209 Appeal before the jurisdiction of the appellate tribunal of the Income Tax Authorities Appealing by the Commissioner was not merely an administrative or ministerial act, the question before the High Court was: Was the appeal properly before the appellate tribunal? Was unable to be retained on this basis because the Commissioner, who had earlier, when he was the Commissioner (Appeal), issued the order against which he had appealed, so he filed an appeal against his own order. Can not The Department held that the signing of the memorandum of appeal was merely an administrative / ministerial act and that the Commissioner had no option but to sign the memorandum of appeal against this order, pursuant to sections 2 (13), 209 (1) and 209. Read collectively (2) Income Tax Ordinance 2001 made it clear that the Commissioner was not the only authority who could file an appeal against his decision as Commissioner (Appeal) and he could ask him immediately. It is better to assign another officer of the Inland Revenue Section 132 of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 the right to file an appeal against a particular order than to appeal to the taxpayer and the commissioner for the purpose of filing an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal Act. Recognized as parties. Appealing after the decision that the department is out of order. Under the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, none of the basic functions of the Commissioner can be termed as an administrative or ministerial act, therefore, it was not a regulatory function in which an appeal against an order was necessary. The use of personal judgment and the use of discretion that the department was affected by an injunction, in the light of the law,
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2015
