SCEPTRE (PVT.) LTD. vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN S — 2026 PTD 925 FEDERAL-CONSTITUTIONAL-COURT

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

SCEPTRE (PVT.) LTD. VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN S.175---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.175F(c)---Tax raid---Power of entry and search---Exercise of power not contingent upon existence of pending proceedings---Whether authority can act independently for enforcement of any provision of the Income Tax Ordinance---The petitioner challenged before the Federal Constitutional Court the judgment passed by the High Court whereby its writ petition against a raid conducted by tax authorities under Section 175 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 was dismissed and the action of the authorities was upheld; prior to the raid a notice under Section 176 of the Ordinance had been issued seeking certain information and documents from the petitioner, which were submitted, and the matter thereafter reached the Federal Constitutional Court through a petition seeking leave to appeal against the High Court's decision---Question requiring determination was “whether, under Section 175 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, the Commissioner or authorized officer could lawfully exercise powers of entry, search, and inspection of a taxpayer's premises in the absence of any pending proceedings?”---Held: When Parliament had expressly provided that “In order to enforce any provision of the Ordinance, the Commissioner or any officer authorized in writing by the Commissioner for the purposes of this section shall, at all times and without prior notice, have full and free access [including real-time electronic access] to any premises, place, accounts, documents or computer,” how could a court of law read into the statutory provision that a proceeding must be pending before Section 175(1)(a) of the Ordinance could be triggered?---The answer was that it could not---What the reading of Section 175 of the Ordinance holistically suggested was that it “empowered” the Commissioner to act for the “enforcement of any provision of this Ordinance”---Examination of section 175 of the Ordinance showed that the words used were very clear and simple, that this provision could be invoked for enforcement of any provision of the Ordinance---In view of the referred provision of law and the factual aspects of the matter, the impugned judgment did not suffer from any infirmity warranting interference---Leave was refused and present petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

SCEPTRE (PVT.) LTD. vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN S — 2026 PTD 925 FEDERAL-CONSTITUTIONAL-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PTD