COMMISSIONER (LEGAL DIVISION) LARGE TAXPAYER UNIT, KARACHI vs BROOK BOND PAKISTAN LIMITED, KARACHI Ss — 2022 PTD 467 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation: 2022 PTD 467 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court: Sindh High Court
Year: 2022
Reporter: PTD
Parties: COMMISSIONER (LEGAL DIVISION) LARGE TAXPAYER UNIT, KARACHI vs BROOK BOND PAKISTAN LIMITED, KARACHI Ss
Subject matter: Tax & Customs
Provisions referred to: S. 4---I; S. 133; S. 52; S. 50; Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 2001); Income Tax Ordinance

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

Judgment text as reported

COMMISSIONER (LEGAL DIVISION) LARGE TAXPAYER UNIT, KARACHI VS BROOK BOND PAKISTAN LIMITED, KARACHI Ss.50(4a), 52 & 86---Sales of Goods act (III of 1930), S. 4---Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 2001), S. 133(4)---Commission/trade discount---assessee in default---Determination---Sale agreement---Scope---Respondent-assessee claimed that disputed amount was not commission rather it was trade discount, therefore no tax was deducted---assessing Officer made assessment under S.52 of Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, treating respondent as assessee in default---assessment order was set aside by appellate authority and Income Tax appellate Tribunal dismissed appeal filed by authorities---Validity---Transaction between parties culminated when seller or transferee agreed to transfer property to buyer for a price---Goods were delivered by respondent-assessee after receiving full amount in advance from distributor, hence such aspect of sale of goods to distributor had come to an end as distributer had become owner of the product--- authorities below had reached to a finding of fact that nature of transaction entered between respondent-assessee with its distributor denoted allowing of trade discount and not commission to the distributor and no convincing material was placed either before appellate authority or Income Tax appellate Tribunal or before the High Court---High Court declined to interfere in the orders passed by two forums below as arrangement so entered between respondent-assessee and distributor allowed trade discount and not a commission to the distributor, hence provisions of S. 50 (4a) of Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 (since repealed) were not applicable---Reference was dismissed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2022 PTD

2022 PTD 1169 SUPREME-COURTCOMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, LAHORE VS HNR COMPANY (PVT.) LIMITED, LAHORE S. 177(10)---audit---Best judgment assessment---Section 177(10) of…
2022 PTD 222 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREATTOCK PETROLEUM LIMITED (APL) VS NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY S.10---National Highway Authority Regulatory Framework and Standard Operating P…
2022 PTD 1566 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHIKRAAM KHAN VS State S.497---Bail---Scope---Where case does not fall within the prohibitory clause of S. 497, Cr.P.C., bail is to be granted…
2022 PTD 1464 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHCELLANDGENE PHARMACEUTICAL INTERNATIONAL VS The FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Islamabad S.177---audit---Sco…
2022 PTD 1153 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHCOLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS VS CUSTOMS APPELLATE TRIBUNAL S.180---Issuance of show cause notice before confiscation of goods or imposition of penal…
2022 PTD 812 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHSALEEM BUTT VS PAKISTAN through Secretary Revenue Division S.6---Repeal of law---Principle---Where Federal law is struck-down by High Court…

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English