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

COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE (LEGAL), ISLAMABAD vs PAKISTAN LNG LIMITED — 2026 PTD 192 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Citation
2026 PTD 192 SUPREME-COURT
Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Year
2026
Reporter
PTD
Parties
COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE (LEGAL), ISLAMABAD vs PAKISTAN LNG LIMITED
Subject matter
Constitutional

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 (LEGAL), ISLAMABAD VS PAKISTAN LNG LIMITED. Ss. 137(2) & 140---Adverse order passed by the Commissioner Inland Revenue-Appeals---Appeals---Immediate coercive recovery of tax from bank holding money on behalf of the taxpayer---Doctrine of merger---Scope---Within a short span of time (of about eight and half hours), from the decision by the Commissioner Inland Revenue-Appeals and it being uploaded on the FBR's web portal, notice for immediate recovery from Bank was sought by the Department on the same date as the notice---Legality---When an appeal is properly brought before a higher authority, and that authority either modifies, reverses, or upholds the order put in issue before it, the order from the lower authority merges with the decision from the higher authority, and it is the latter which subsists, remains operative and is capable of enforcement in the eyes of the law---Said concept is known as the doctrine of merger, which is rooted in the necessity to maintain order within the judicial process and to uphold the integrity of the justice delivery system---The rationale supporting the merger doctrine is clear: there can only be one operative order addressing the same subject matter at any given moment---In light of said doctrine, it can be logically deduced that, following the appellate order, the previous notice issued under Section 137(2), pursuant to the assessment order or amended assessment order, had lost its significance and efficacy; it stood wiped out---Thus, the petitioner-Revenue/Department remained unable to substantiate the validity of the notice under Section 140 of the Ordinance, 2001, consequently, no disturbance in the acceptance of the taxpayer's (respondent's) writ petitions and dismissal of the petitioner's (Revenue's) Intra-Court appeals were made out---Appeals, filed by Department, were dismissed.

Other judgments reported in 2026 PTD

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