PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE vs LAHORE RUBBER STORE Ss — 2023 PTD 182 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation
2023 PTD 182 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court
Lahore High Court
Year
2023
Reporter
PTD
Parties
COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE vs LAHORE RUBBER STORE Ss
Subject matter
Tax & Customs
Provisions referred to
S. 57---F; S. 70---R; S. 221; S. 57; S. 70; Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990); Federal Excise Act (VII of 2005); Income Tax Ordinance; Sales Tax Act; Federal Excise Act

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 INLAND REVENUE VS LAHORE RUBBER STORE Ss.133 & 221---Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990), S.57---Federal Excise Act (VII of 2005), S.70---Rectification---Principle---Taxpayer was a retailer who was treated as manufacturer for the purposes of taxation---Taxpayer sought rectification of ex-parte order passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, which was allowed and order passed by authorities was set aside---Validity---Rectification was a jurisdiction ancillary to appellate jurisdiction intended to rectify a mistake of fact or law apparent on face of record, which did not require investigation, appraisal of evidence, interpretation of law or inquiry into facts---Rectification jurisdiction could not be a substitute of tax reference, therefore, Tribunal was to check bona fide by seeking explanation for not filing rectification application soon after date of receiving certified copy of final order---After exercising original jurisdiction, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal had become functus officio with a little window for rectification of a mistake, which was an equitable remedy because law favoured justice to ensure an apparent and floating mistake, causing injustice was allowed to be rectified within limitation of five years---Appealable order attained finality on expiration of limitation for filing appeal or other remedy, such a finality could not be compromised by filing an application for rectification to manage rehearing or review the matter---Any injustice, because of an identified mistake, was rectifiable as envisaged in S.221 of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, S.57 of Sales Tax Act, 1990 and S.70 of Federal Excise Act, 2005---High Court set aside order in question as jurisdiction was improper and remanded the matter to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to decide application of rectification afresh---Reference was disposed of accordingly.

Other judgments reported in 2023 PTD

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