ORDER SHEET
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Order with signature of Judge
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Present
Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
Mr. Justice Abdul Ghani Soomro
Mr. Shamsi Sadruddin Ahmed ………..… Petitioner
V E R S U S
Federation of Pakistan & others ………….. Respondents
Date of hearing: 16.08.2016
Mr. Waseem Shaikh, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. Kafeel Ahmed Abbasi, Advocate for the Respondents.
-------------------------
Muhammad Ali Mazhar, J: The learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out an order dated 30.05.2013 available at Page 143 of the court file through which five years assessment orders were taken into consideration by the Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals-II), Karachi and finally the learned Commissioner reached to the conclusion that Section 122-C of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 could not be applied retrospectively on tax years 2008, 2009 and 2010 while the provisional assessment orders for the tax years 2011 and 2012 were set aside with the direction to be made afresh after allowing adequate opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. It is further contended that this order was challenged by the department before the Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue (Pakistan) Karachi, but vide order dated 30.05.2016, the learned Tribunal Inland Revenue affirmed the order as it relates to tax years 2008 to 2010 and for the tax years 2011 and 2012, they observed that CIR (A) has rightly remanded the issue of the DCIR.
-2-
Learned counsel argued that after annulling three years’ assessment orders, the department is liable to refund back the amount of tax recovered in pursuance of notice issued under Section 140 read with Rule 96 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001.
2. The learned counsel for the Income Tax Department argued that the findings of Commissioner (Appeals-II) and the Appellate Tribunal are perverse and without jurisdiction, therefore, department has decided to file a reference in this Court. However, he pointed out Section 124 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 and argued that at least two years statutory period is available to the department to give the effect to the orders passed by the Appellate Tribunal, High Court or Supreme Court and he proposed that the petitioner may file appropriate application to the concerned Commissioner for giving effect to the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue, Pakistan, for further proceedings.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has shown his willingness to file proper application in accordance with the law.
4. The petition is disposed of with the direction that as soon as any such application is filed, appropriate orders will be passed for giving effect to the orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) as well as the Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue in accordance with law for the refund of aforesaid recovered amount of tax. The pending applications are also disposed of.
JUDGE
JUDGE
Asif