IMRAN ASHRAF vs GOVERNMENT OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR Ss — 2026 PTD 221 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

IMRAN ASHRAF VS GOVERNMENT OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR Ss.153, 236G & 236H---Tax, collection of---Withholding tax agents (wholesalers, distributors and retailers)---Constitutionality of enactment---Legislature, powers of---Contention of the petitioners (wholesalers and distributors) was that S. 236H was the repetition of Ss. 153 and 236G of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001---Validity---It is oozing from the bare perusal of the S.236-H that tax palpably is collectible from retailers, while the petitioners are distributors/wholesalers, thus, the wholesalers and distributors merely act as withholding tax agents when they make sales to retailers, consequent of which burden of advance tax collected under section 236-H rests upon retailers---Although all Ss. (153, 236G and 236H) relate to withholding and advance taxes, but they cover different types of transactions and have different applicability---Section 236G is related to the advance tax on sales made to distributors, dealers and wholesalers and S. 236H deals with the advance tax on sales to retailers---The whole idea behind the scheme was build up a database of unregistered persons and then use this information for broadening of tax base---Section 153 is a tax on payments for goods and services, while Ss. 236G and 236H are taxes on sales of specific goods---Pertinently, all the withholding taxes/advance taxes (sections 148 to 156 and Ss. 231 to 236) under Income Tax Ordinance are being withheld/collected through the persons other than Inland Revenue Department since decades, thus, the distributors/wholesalers are not the sole withholding tax agents---Tax under S. 236 is a tax on income of a retailer and the same cannot be shifted to consumers---Tax collectable under Ss. 153, 236G and 236H is to be borne by suppliers, distributors and retailers respectively against the income separately---The tax chargeable under S. 236H is nominal which merely serves to document the economy in view of contribution in GDP i.e. 18%---Presumption is always there in favour of the constitutionality of enactment in case of challenge being made to it, however, another principle qua presumption regarding judging the statute is that there should have been no classification at all (excepting reasonable classification)---No eventuality arose from the case to take contra presumption---In case of revenue relating laws, if they are questioned and attacked and equal possible interpretations can be possible one favouring the revenue is to be adopted---Petitioner had failed to point out any illegality or irregularity on the part of the respondents---Writ can be issued where any violation of law and rules is pointed out but no such eventuality has been found in the present case---Petitioners failed to make out their case for interference---Writ petition was dismissed.

IMRAN ASHRAF vs GOVERNMENT OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR Ss — 2026 PTD 221 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PTD