Find a Lawyer

MESSRS VOLKART PAKISTAN (PRIVATE) LIMITED THROUGH MANAGER FINANCE versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN

Section 2 (e) (ii) (h), 3, 7 and 17 Wealth Tax Rules, 1963, R8 (3) 1991 CBR Circular No. 18 (Wealth Tax) Period 2 199 1991 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Fourth Schedule, Part I, Entry No. 50, Arts & 199 Petition and Constitution 25 Constitutional petition applicants, charge of taxing the wealth of private limited companies, that section of the Wealth Tax Act, 636363 of ((e) (ii) ) Be regarded as unconstitutional in the Constitution, outside the jurisdiction of Parliament and outside the jurisdiction of Parliament, pursuant to Entry No. 50, Part I of the Fourth Schedule to the Constitution and the Explanation of Section 2 (e) (ii) of the Taxes Act, 1963). The source was also introduced through the Finance Act 1991 - be declared ultra-virus and that the applicant companies should not be eligible for Wealth Tax, as they were not intended to leave the property and that the notices issued under the AA7 and 14 (2) Act To be removed, the High Court overturned by observations that related to the assertion of wealth tax hockey. In the case of De Haji Muhammad Shafi v. Wealth Tax Officer 1992 PTD 726, the decision was already made by the Supreme Court. And the Dictation given by the Supreme Court in the case of Messrs. Divine Cotton Mills Ltd. v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 1997 More covered. SC 582 constitutional petition was rejected by the High Court accordingly criminal advocate from Kachhi/Bolan lawyer