Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

SAINRAPT & ET BRICE KARACHI versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (WEST) PAKISTAN


Words relating to losses sustained in clause (s) of section 24 (2) (1), (ii) of section 24 (2) are prohibited by such business Hel, which is not controlled by \ loss or Not qualified but referring to and qualifying words any In any other business, ula, a non-speculative business valuation company, which does business individually and also has partnerships with other companies. The loss of business in the forefront of the business, can be prevented against the profits made by Assisi in his individual business. Dear and another vs. Muhammad Ibrahim PLD 1977 SC 422 and Judicial Dictionary of Straubud, 4th edn Vol 5, page 2662 Not Applicable [Words and phrases]
P L D 1979 Karachi 591

Before Abdul Hayee Kureshi and I. Mahmud, JJ

MESSERS SAINRAPT & ET. BRICE, KARACHI‑Applicant versus

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME‑TAX (WEST), KARACHI‑Respondent

Income‑tax Reference No. 25 of 1970, decided on 12th March 1979.

(a) Income‑tax Act (XI of 1922)‑

‑‑ S. 24 (2) (1), (ii)‑‑Set‑off of carried forward loss‑Words "such business" in clause (it) of S. 24 (2)‑Held, not controlled or qualified by word "loss" but refer to and qualify words "in any other business" i. e. non‑speculative business‑Assesses‑Company carrying on businesses individually and also in partnership with other Company‑Apportioned carried‑forward share of loss in partnership business‑Held, can be set off against profits earned by assessee in its individual business [Abdul Aziz and another v. Muhammad Ibrahim P L D 1977 S C 422 and Stroud's Judicial Dictionary, 4th Edn. Vol. 5, p. 2662 not applicable].‑[Words and phrases].

Rais Pir Ahmed Khan v. Commissioner of Income‑tax, Lahore Zone Lahore 1975 P T D 70 ; Sitaram Motirarn Jain v. Commissioner of Income‑tax (1961) 43 I T R 405 ; Messers Wallem & Co. (Pak.) Ltd., Karachi v. Commis sioner of Income‑tax 1974 P T D 207 and Pheroze Ali v. Commissioner of Income‑tax (West), Karachi P L D 1978 Kar. 765 ref.

Abdul Azis and another v. Muhammad Ibrahim P L D 1977 S C 442 and Stroud's Judicial Dictionary, 4th Edn., Vol. 5, p. 2662 not applicable.

(b) Interpretation of statutes‑

‑‑ Amendment in law‑Consideration whether statute intended to alter law or to leave it exactly where it stood before‑Meaning of words should be considered in light of history of legislation and state of law at time statute passed.

It is well established that in the interpretation of statutes, the meaning of the words should be considered in the light of history of the legislation and the state of the law at the time the statute was passed, in order to consider whether the statute was intended to alter the law or to leave it exactly where it stood before.

Maxwell on Interpretation of Statutes, 12th Edn., p. 47 and Crates on Statute Law, 7th Edn., p. 126 ref.

J. H. Rahimtoola for Applicant.

Mansoor Ahmad Khan for Respondent.

Date of hearing : 21st February 1979.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
law firms from Amangarh lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.