SARDAR WASEEM ILYAS vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN Ss — 2025 PTD 282 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.

SARDAR WASEEM ILYAS VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN Ss.138, 139, 140 & 227---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199---Constitutional petition---Recovery of tax out of property and through arrest of taxpayer-Collection of tax in the case of private companies and associations of persons---Recovery of tax from persons holding money on behalf of a taxpayer---Issuance of notice of demand against petitioner being the Director of the company---Petitioner assailed the notice of recovery of tax issued by the income tax authorities on the grounds of non-mentioning of necessary details of demand and reasons of non-recoverability of the demand from the company in the notice---Validity---Notice under S.140 of the Ordinance did not disclose any detail of creating or shifting the demand enforceable against the petitioner---Prior proceedings under S.138 were sine qua non for invoking the provisions of S.140---Any notice and in particular, notice for recovery, must contain necessary details like assessment, its finality under the law, consequent demand, and in case of coercive measures, the details of earlier notice to which taxpayer did not respond---Notice under S.140, addressed to a third party, must also contain the same details to justify that the ultimate coercive measure is inevitable---Forceful withdrawal of an amount from personal and business account, in absence of due process, was infringement of fundamental rights under Art.23 of the Constitution, besides having negative impact on taxpayer's business and business activities in general---Provisions of S.140 should have been invoked, when Commissioner believed that the taxpayer may run away with the demand, which would become irrecoverable forever---Issuance of notice of recovery against an active taxpayer amounts to robbery without following due process---Till the time it is incorporated in the Rules, the Commissioner should not invoke the provisions of S.140 without seeking prior approval from FBR---Recovery under S.140, without complying with the command of Arts.10A & 19A of the Constitution and that too by ignoring the statutory procedure and law was a misconduct, proceedable under the service laws---Protection under S.227 of the Ordinance was only for actions in good faith and FBR under its subsection (2) could always recommend for disciplinary proceeding for infringing fundamental rights or for non-compliance of judgments by superior Courts---Constitutional petition was allowed with a direction to return the amount recovered from the petitioner illegally.

SARDAR WASEEM ILYAS vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN Ss — 2025 PTD 282 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PTD