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

COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, RTO, LYALPUR ZONE, FAISALABAD vs M.M — 2024 PTD 99 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation
2024 PTD 99 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court
Lahore High Court
Year
2024
Reporter
PTD
Parties
COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, RTO, LYALPUR ZONE, FAISALABAD vs M.M
Subject matter
Tax & Customs
Provisions referred to
S. 113; S. 153; 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 INLAND REVENUE, RTO, LYALPUR ZONE, FAISALABAD VS M.M. ENTERPRISES (MUNIR AHMAD), FAISALABAD Ss. 113, 133 (1) & Second Sched., Part-IV, Cl. 45A---Notification SRO No. 333(I)/2011, dated 02-05-2011---Reference---Withholding tax---Deductions---Whether the Appellate Tribunal had not erred in law by vacating orders passed by lower fora wrongly relying on Notification SRO 333(I)/2011, dated 02-05-2011 and Clause 45A of Part IV of Second Sched. ignoring S.113 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001---Validity---Restraint imposed specifically excluded incidence of withholding tax deductions under S.153(1)(a) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001---As no deduction was permissible, therefore, no question of classification of such deduction as final tax, in terms of S.153(3) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 had arisen---Taxpayer claimed income from both streams, covered under normal and final tax regimes---Incidence of deduction of withholding tax under S. 153(1)(a) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 and claiming benefit of proviso were mutually exclusive---Allegations that withholding tax deductions were claimed as corresponding adjustment of minimum tax liability were misconceived---Provision of S. 113 of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 was not ignored and order of Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue was not fully comprehended---Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue did not commit any illegality and had rightly construed scope and effect of proviso to Cl. 45A of Part-IV of Second Schedule to Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 and correctly allowed concessional rates for the purposes of minimum tax liability---High Court declined to interfere in the matter as Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue did not commit any error while construing S.113 and Cl. 45A, Part-IV of Second Sched. to Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 for the purposes of relevant tax years--Reference was dismissed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2024 PTD

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