Lawyers Directory Listing
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.
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 99 of 1977, decided on 9th March 1980.
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court dated 7th March 1973 in T. R. 391 of 1972).
S. 46(1)‑Permission to respondent by Central Board of Revenue to pay its income‑tax in instalments‑A circumstance relevant to ques tion whether appeal against penalty imposed on respondent be allowed or not‑Income‑tax Appellate Tribunal, held, cannot be laid to have acted illegally in allowing respondent's appeal against penalty imposed‑Case, held, not a fit case for grant of special leave to appeal, in circumstances.
Bawany Violin Textile Mills Ltd., Karachi v. Commissioner of Income‑tax
1967 P T D 622, ref.
S. Abdul Haque, Senior Advocate, S. Riazul Haq, Advocate and Iftikhar uddin Ahmad, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondent.
Date of hearing: 9th March 1980.
The Income‑tax Officer had imposed a penalty on the respondent under section 46(1) of the Income‑tax Act, because the respondent had failed tea comply with the demand notice served by the Income‑tax Officer with regard to the assessment made by the Income‑tax Officer for the charge year 1971‑72. The respondent had challenged the impugned order in an appeal before the Income‑tax Appellate Tribunal which was pressed by the respondent on the ground, inter alia, that the Central Board of Revenue had allowed its application to pay the Income‑tax due from it in instalments. This objection was accepted on the basis of the judgment in Bawany Violin Textile Mills Ltd., Karachi v. Commissioner of Income‑tax (1967 P T D 622), and as the Tribunal thus set aside the penalty imposed on the respondent, the petitioner referred the following question to the Lahore High Court:‑
"Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Appellate; Tribunal was justified in holding that the penalty imposed by the Income‑tax Officer under section 46(I) of the Income‑tax Act was not exigible under the law."
As the petitioner's application was rejected in limine by Lahore High Court can 7‑3‑1973, the petitioner has filed this petition for leave.
Mr. Abdul Haque challenged the validity of the view taken by the Karachi Seat of the West Pakistan High Court in Bawany Violin Textile Mills Ltd.'s case and submitted that the observations of the learned Judges were too wide. We find however that it is not necessary for us to examine this submission, because the fact that the Central Board of Revenue had permitted the respondent to pay its income‑tax in instalments was a circumstance relevant to the question whether appeal of the respondent against the penalty imposed on it should be allowed or not. Therefore. it cannot be said that the Tribunal had acted illegally in allowing the respondent's appeal against than penalty imposed on it and, therefore, it is not a fit ease for the grant of special leave.
In these circumstances, we would leave open the question of the validity of the observations in Bawany Violin Textile Mills Ltd.s case and dismiss the petition on the ground that the Tribunal had acted within its jurisdiction in allowing the to respondent's appeal.
Appeal allowed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer