PAK TELECOM MOBILE LIMITED vs FEDERAL BOARD OF REVENUE (FBR) Ss — 2025 PTD 757 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Citation: 2025 PTD 757 ISLAMABAD
Court: Islamabad High Court
Year: 2025
Reporter: PTD
Parties: PAK TELECOM MOBILE LIMITED vs FEDERAL BOARD OF REVENUE (FBR) Ss
Subject matter: Tax & Customs
Provisions referred to: 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

PAK TELECOM MOBILE LIMITED VS FEDERAL BOARD OF REVENUE (FBR) Ss.177 & 214C & Second Schedule, Cl. 105a [as inserted by Finance act, 2022]---Insertion of a new amendment under Clause 105a in the Second Schedule ('Clause 105a ') of Income Tax Ordinance , 2001 ('the Ordinance, 2001')---Retrospective effect---audit proceedings, applicability of---In the absence of any indication of its retrospective operation, the new amendment must not be given retrospective effect---Generally, beneficial legislation is to be given liberal interpretation, however, for the said legislation to have a retrospective effect, the beneficial legislation must carry curative or remedial content--- Such legislation must, therefore, either clarify an ambiguity or an omission in the existing law and must therefore be explanatory or clarificatory---In the present case, there was no specific wording that the concession shall apply retrospectively hence, it could not be construed by any canon of interpretation that said amendment had a retrospective effect---Consequently, in the absence of any indication in the statute that the legislation intended for it to operate retroactively, it must not be given retrospective effect---In any case, the provisions related to fiscal statutes will be interpreted prospectively, not retrospectively---The impugned notice was issued to the petitioner on 14.01.2022, while the said amendment in the Ordinance, 2001 was enacted with effect from 01.07.2022 ; hence, the petitioner could not be benefited from the new amendment---Constitutional petition, filed by taxpayer / company, being merit-less was dismissed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2025 PTD

2025 PTD 1833 BALOCHISTAN-SALES-TAX-ON-SERVICES-APPELLATE-TRIBUNAL, QUETTACASING CORPORATION (PVT.) LIMITED VS COMMISSIONER BALOCHISTAN REVENUE AUTHORITY. Ss. 2(115), 2(139), 25 & 27 - Balochistan Sales Tax on Serv…
2025 PTD 1230 SUPREME-COURTKASSIM TEXTILE MILLS (PVT.) LIMITED VS COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, KARACHI Literal rule---Legislation---Powers of Court---Where words of st…
2025 PTD 1179 SUPREME-COURTWAK LIMITED MULTAN ROAD, LAHORE VS COLLECTOR CENTRAL EXCISE AND SALES TAX, LAHORE (NOW COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, LTU, LAHORE) Statutory d…
2025 PTD 1634 SUPREME-COURTThe DIRECTORATE OF POST CLEARANCE AUDIT through DG, FBR, Islamabad VS NESTLE PAKISTAN LIMITED, ISLAMABAD art. 185(3)---Petition for leave to…
2025 PTD 1270 SUPREME-COURTDIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE AND INVESTIGATION-FBR, through Director VS TAJ INTERNATIONAL (PVT.) LTD. Ss. 2(37), 3, 11, 33 & 37a---assessment…
2025 PTD 1270 SUPREME-COURTDIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE AND INVESTIGATION-FBR, through Director VS TAJ INTERNATIONAL (PVT.) LTD. Imposing of tax---Principle---Under mod…

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