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

PETER C/o Messrs PETER & CO. vs COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, RTO, ISLAMABAD Ss — 2025 PTD 1904 INLAND REVENUE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OF PAKISTAN

Case information

Citation
2025 PTD 1904 INLAND REVENUE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OF PAKISTAN
Year
2025
Reporter
PTD
Parties
PETER C/o Messrs PETER & CO. vs COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, RTO, ISLAMABAD Ss
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 172; 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

PETER C/o Messrs PETER & CO. VS COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, RTO, ISLAMABAD Ss. 172(3)(a), 172(3)(b), 172(3)(c), 172(3)(d), 172(3)(e), 172(3)(f) & 223---Non-resident person---Authorized / statutory representative of taxpayer, role of---Scope---A non-resident company conducted business through a branch office in Pakistan , which had been represented by a Chartered Accountants Firm , however , later non-resident company closed its business---Chartered Accountants (Appellant ) assailed orders passed by the Tax Authorities ( the Commissioner Inland Revenue and the Assistant Commissioner Inland Revenue) treating them (Appellant) as a representative of said non-resident Company under S.172(3)(f) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 ('the Ordinance 2001')---Held, that, the Assistant Commissioner based his decision on the pendency of an Income Tax Reference before the High Court, where notice could not be served on the respondents as directed by the (High) Court---Notably, the High Court, dismissed the tax reference-under-discussion filed by the tax authorities against non-resident company---Therefore, the foundation on which the appellant was declared as statutory representative no longer held field, rendering the Assistant Commissioner's decision unsustainable and legally untenable---Thus, status of Appellant did not automatically qualify them for appointment as a representative under S.172(3)(f) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, but the same required a distinct fiduciary relationship and financial connection with the non-resident company---Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue annulled the orders passed by the Tax Authorities---Appeal was allowed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2025 PTD

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