| Case ID |
2c67a9f2-deaa-40d1-94f3-75b33ce26390 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
M.A. (A.G.) Nos. 1 and 2 of 1994, I.T.As. Nos.6173 |
| Decision Date |
Oct 25, 1994 |
| Hearing Date |
Oct 25, 1994 |
| Decision |
The Tribunal allowed the application for amended grounds of appeal, emphasizing that the technical errors made by the Authorized Representative (A.R.) should not hinder the pursuit of justice for the assessee. The decision highlighted that all grounds sought to be raised were previously presented before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and that the failure to draft distinct grounds was a mere technicality. The Tribunal noted that amendments are permitted in civil proceedings, including appeals, and that such amendments should facilitate justice rather than obstruct it. The Tribunal directed the appellant to file the amended grounds of appeal and supply copies to the learned D.R. before the next hearing. |
| Summary |
In the case of M.A. (A.G.) Nos. 1 and 2 of 1994, the Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue addressed the issue of technical errors in the drafting of appeal grounds by the Authorized Representative. The case involved Dr. Muhammad Sohail Akhtar Qureshi as the petitioner against the Executive Director of Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences, Islamabad. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of allowing amendments in grounds of appeal to ensure justice is served, particularly when no new facts or legal questions were introduced. The ruling reinforced that technical mistakes should not impede the legal process, aligning with principles of justice and procedural fairness. The Tribunal's decision reflects a commitment to uphold the rights of the assessee, ensuring that technicalities do not obstruct the proper administration of justice. This case underscores the significance of clear legal representation and adherence to procedural requirements while allowing flexibility to correct genuine mistakes that do not affect the substantive rights of the parties involved. The ruling serves as a precedent for similar cases where technical errors may arise, promoting an equitable legal process. |
| Court |
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
MUHAMMAD MUJIBULLAH SIDDIQUI,
ASAD ARIF
|
| Lawyers |
A.K. Shamim,
Basharatullah Khan
|
| Petitioners |
Dr. MUHAMMAD SOHAIL AKHTAR QURESHI
|
| Respondents |
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PAKISTAN INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, ISLAMABAD
|
| Citations |
1995 SLD 27,
1995 PTD 329,
(1994) 70 TAX 89
|
| Other Citations |
Not available
|
| Laws Involved |
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1981
|
| Sections |
14,
10
|