| Case ID |
0aaca5b7-b6bc-40c3-9e4d-f965a03d9060 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
D-324 and Miscellaneous No. 867 of 2001 |
| Decision Date |
Jun 18, 2001 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The court dismissed the constitutional petition filed by Roche Pakistan Ltd against the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, affirming that the issuance of a notice under section 62 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 was lawful and not mala fide. The court emphasized that adequate alternate remedies were available to the petitioner through appeals and references before the relevant tax authorities. Therefore, the constitutional jurisdiction was not invoked appropriately, and the court reiterated that the principles of res judicata do not apply in income tax cases as each assessment year is treated independently. The court advised that the Deputy Commissioner must be given the opportunity to consider the petitioner's responses and make a determination based on the law and facts presented. |
| Summary |
In the notable case of Roche Pakistan Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, the Sindh High Court dealt with the constitutional petition challenging the issuance of a notice under section 62 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979. Roche, a pharmaceutical company, contested the Deputy Commissioner's authority, asserting that the notice was issued mala fide and without jurisdiction. However, the court found that the Deputy Commissioner was acting within his legal powers to seek further information before finalizing the tax assessment. The ruling highlighted the importance of following statutory remedies available to taxpayers, emphasizing that all income tax assessments are independent proceedings. The decision reinforces the legal principle that constitutional petitions should not bypass available administrative remedies, thereby ensuring that tax authorities can perform their duties without undue interference. This case serves as a critical reference for taxpayers and legal practitioners navigating the complexities of tax law and the judicial process in Pakistan. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF Income Tax,
ROCHE PAKISTAN LTD
|
| Judges |
S. AHMED SARWANA,
MUHAMMAD MOOSA K. LEGHARI
|
| Lawyers |
Fatehali Vellani for Petitioner,
Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi for Respondents
|
| Petitioners |
ROCHE PAKISTAN LTD
|
| Respondents |
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF Income Tax and others
|
| Citations |
2001 SLD 691,
2001 PTD 3090,
(2001) 84 TAX 302
|
| Other Citations |
Attock Cement Pakistan Ltd. v. Collector of Customs 1999 PTD 1892,
Central Insurance Company v. C.B.R. 1993 SCMR 1232,
CIT v. Jennings Private School 1993 SCMR 96,
Julian Hoshang Dinshaw Trust v. I.T.O. 1992 PTD 1,
Eduljee Dinshaw Limited v. I.T.O. 1990 PTD 155 = PLD 1990 SC 399,
Adamjee Insurance Co. Ltd. v. C.B.R. 1989 PTD 1090,
Ms. Tayabba v. The Controller of Examinations PLD 1976 Kar. 481,
Prince Glass Works Ltd. v. C.B.R. = Messrs GEC Avery (Pvt.) Limited v. Government of Pakistan 1995 PTD 856,
Ellahi Cotton Mills Ltd. v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 1997 SC 582,
CIT v. National Agriculture Ltd. 2000 PTD 254,
Shagufta Begum v. I.T.O. PLD 1989 SC 360,
Khalid Mehmood v. Collector of Customs 1999 SCMR 1881,
H.M. Abdulla v. I.T.O. 1993 SCMR 1195,
CIT v. Hamdard Dawakhana PLD 1992 SC 847,
AI-Ahram Builders v. I.T.A.T. 1993 SCMR 29,
Yasmeen Lari v. Registrar, Income-tax Appellate Tribunal 1990 PTD 967,
Arafat Woollen Mills v. I.T.O. 1990 SCMR 697,
Amin Textile Mills (Pvt.) Ltd. v. CIT and others 2000 SCMR 101
|
| Laws Involved |
Income Tax Ordinance, 1979,
Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
|
| Sections |
50(4),
50(5),
61,
62,
59A,
79,
80C,
199
|