DILSON (PVT.) LTD. vs COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, CTO, LAHORE Ss — 2026 PTD 839 INLAND REVENUE APPELLATE TRIB

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

DILSON (PVT.) LTD. VS COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, CTO, LAHORE Ss. 122(5a) & 221---amended assessment (original) order, passing / assailing of---Subsequent rectification order, passing of---appeal already filed against original order---Maintainability---Merger of successive orders---Scope---Whether the original order mergers into the subsequent rectified order or it ceases to exist or still holds the field?---Held : there is no 'merger' where an order is passed rectifying any mistake in the original order; there is neither 'merger' nor 'supersession'---The original order gets amended/wiped out by the order of rectification by correcting the error---In the present case, the taxation officer in rectification order modified its Original Order by allowing huge relief to the appellant / Company on the grounds claimed by it in its rectification application--- Thus, when the Original Order had been modified by the rectification order passed by the Officer Inland Revenue (OIR), the Original Order stood amended and as such the subsequent rectification order alone would survive for the purpose of filing appeal---Had the rectification application been dismissed and there been no relief in rectification application no question of appeal against subsequent rectified order would have arisen and the appeal was maintainable against the original order---If the Rectification application is allowed partly through modification, the order becomes a composite order whereby the OIR not only vacates the earlier order but simultaneously passes an order modifying the original order earlier passed---There cannot be two different orders standing against one assessment governing the same subject matter at a given point of time---The subsequent order vacated, reversed or modified is the order that is effective for the purpose of appeal, if any, maintainable under the law---In the present case, the appealable order would be rectified order ; as the original order stood amended/modified, therefore, the subsequent rectified order would survive for the purpose of filing of appeal as the original order no more held the field---Thus, the original order under appeal had ceased to exist after modification in rectification application, therefore, the instant appeal was no more maintainable before appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue---appeal against the original amended assessment order, filed by taxpayer, being non-maintainable, was dismissed. Citation Name: 2026 PTD 839 INLAND REVENUE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OF PAKISTANBookmark this Case DILSON (PVT.) LTD. VS COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, CTO, LAHORE Doctrine of merger----Principles stated---(a) Where any order of decree of a Court, authority or Tribunal is subjected to an appeal or revision and the appellate or revisional authority passes an order modifying, reversing or affirming the original order, the original order merges with the order of the superior authority on the principle that there cannot be more than one order operating at the same ; (b) if the Appeal or Revision is restricted to a delinkable part or portion of the original order or one of the several matters or issues dealt by the original order, then, only that part of the original order which is the subject-matter of the appeal or revision will merge in the order of the superior authority and the remaining portion of the original order which is not subjected to appeal or revision will remain undisturbed ; (c) where the Appellate authority has given plenary jurisdiction over the entire matter dealt with by the original order, irrespective of the fact whether Appeal is filed in regard to the entire matter or part of the matter, the entire original order will merge in the order of the Appellate Authority---However, where such appellate authority entrusted with plenary jurisdiction consciously restricts the scope of scrutiny to only a part of the original order, then, whether only that part of the original order which is subjected to scrutiny and not the entire order will get merged with the order of the appellate authority, has been that the merger will be in respect of the entire order (d) there will be no merger at all where the subsequent order is passed by the same authority, either by way of review or rectification---Where an order is passed on review the original order gets wiped out as it is set aside by the order granting review and is superseded by the order made on review.

DILSON (PVT.) LTD. vs COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, CTO, LAHORE Ss — 2026 PTD 839 INLAND REVENUE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OF PAKISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PTD