CHENAB FLOUR AND GENERAL MILLS vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN S — 2021 PTD 892 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

CHENAB FLOUR AND GENERAL MILLS VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN S. 209(8a)---Federal Board of Revenue act (IV of 2007), Ss. 4(1)(a) & 4(1)(h)---Jurisdiction of income tax authorities---Scope---Federal Board of Revenue (FBR)---Regulatory and administrative powers---Scope---By way of Notification No.F.No.1 (48)Jurisdiction/2014-177049-R dated 12.10.2020 (the “impugned notification”) taxing jurisdiction of petitioner-tax-payers was changed from the Regional Tax Office (“RTO”) to the Large Taxpayer Office (“LTO”), by the Federal Board of Revenue (“FBR”) under S. 209 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 (2001 Ordinance)---Question as to whether exercise of jurisdiction to transfer cases from RTO to LTO under S.209 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 ('the 2001 Ordinance') was ultra vires the 2001 Ordinance---Held, that perusal of the impugned notification revealed that the Chief Commissioner Inland Revenue, LTO, had been given powers to perform functions under the fiscal laws, which was proper, valid and within the permissive ambit of law---If a regulator, such as the FBR, was restrained from performance of its function it would negate the very purpose of law, which chalked out the functionality of such regulator---Impugned Notification, was an expression of policy decision, issued within the ambit of delegated functions of the FBR---Said notification was competently issued under enabling provisions of the law and validly conferred jurisdiction of the Commissioner under the 2001 Ordinance pertaining to particular class of taxpayers as envisaged under S.209, subsection (8a) of the 2001 Ordinance---Impugned notification was within the bound and competence of its parent law and enabling fiscal legislation and well within the object and scope of the Federal Board of Revenue act, 2007 and the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, thus, it carried a strong presumption of legality and competence and presumption of intra vires was also attached with the same---Mere 'probable inconvenience' that the impugned notification might have caused to the petitioners-tax-payers could not be equated with infringement of any of their vested right or fundamental rights---Revamping and restructuring of the FBR tax administration in the form of establishing the LTO to deal only with specified category of cases, including those of petitioners-tax-payers, was neither arbitrary nor adverse to the rights of the petitioners recognized under the law and the Constitution---Impugned notification issued by the FBR under S. 209 of the 2001 Ordinance empowered the FBR to transfer the jurisdiction pertaining to particular class of taxpayers of any RTO to the LTO to improve tax governing mechanism---Constitutional petitions challenging the impugned notification were dismissed with the observation that courts always jealously guarded rights of individuals against the arbitrariness of the State institutions, however, at the same time Courts never turned a blind eye on the progress and development happening around the world and always looked positively towards any attempt to reformulate the tax governing mechanism(s) so initiated by the FBR, in an attempt to contribute in the goal of ease of doing business and taxpayer facilitation.

CHENAB FLOUR AND GENERAL MILLS vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN S — 2021 PTD 892 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2021 PTD