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

Mrs. NASREEN TAYYAB vs COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, ZONE-II, RTO-I, KARACHI Ss — 2026 PTD 680 INLAND REVENUE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OF PAKISTAN

Case information

Citation
2026 PTD 680 INLAND REVENUE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OF PAKISTAN
Year
2026
Reporter
PTD
Parties
Mrs. NASREEN TAYYAB vs COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, ZONE-II, RTO-I, KARACHI Ss
Subject matter
Service
Provisions referred to
Declaration Ordinance; Swift Code

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

Mrs. NASREEN TAYYAB VS COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, ZONE-II, RTO-I, KARACHI Ss. 6(3) & 9---assets Declaration relating to amnesty for foreign assets---Procedure---Failure of taxpayer to discharge liability, allegation of---Findings against taxpayer (lady/individual) were premised on the fact that she was unable to furnish the Computerized Payment Receipt (CPR) of the tax applicable---Validity---The procedure prescribed under assets Declaration Ordinance, 2019, showed that the deposit of tax was to be made from outside Pakistan in National Bank of Pakistan in relevant account No/Swift Code and , in the present case, the same was evident as the proof of payment i.e. money having been transferred by appellant/ taxpayer through her maintained Bank; hence , it was established that the appellant on its own part had done the job well in accordance with law and procedure provided by the Government of Pakistan was followed in letter and spirit---Moreover, said procedure provides that after verification by NBP Karachi regarding receipt of money in the said account, the concerned officer of FBR shall input amount so received in the designated field and in case of short payment, the system will generate SMS/email for the taxpayer regarding the short payment, which can be deposited in cash with the designated NBP branches in major cities---It was agitated by the appellant that concerned officer constantly insisted for provision of CPR despite the fact that appellant had already deposited the tax as evident from payment proof---Therefore, the taxpayer had done her job well in accordance with law, so now onus was upon the Department to reject the version of taxpayer with corroborative evidence---If a person is required by law to do something which becomes impossible for him to do not on account of his own negligence or fault, he cannot be said to have failed to perform that which the law or an order passed under the law required him to do---appellant had proved her case with evidence and the departmental action seemed to be violative of law and rules prescribed by the Government of Pakistan---appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue vacated the impugned order, however, the Department would be at liberty to initiate proceedings in accordance with law in case of having sufficient material---appeal, filed by taxpayer, was allowed accordingly.

Other judgments reported in 2026 PTD

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