| Case ID |
37d61b17-2faa-49ba-921d-2b7b7e4e72b5 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Writ Petition No. 2346 of 2012 |
| Decision Date |
Jun 09, 2021 |
| Hearing Date |
Jun 09, 2021 |
| Decision |
The Lahore High Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, Muhammad Munir Piracha, an advocate, by setting aside the notice issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Inland Revenue, Audit-II, Rawalpindi. The court found that the notice seeking information regarding the breakup of business capital and profit and loss expenses was invalid as it did not specify any purpose such as amendment in assessment. The court emphasized that the petitioner, being a practicing advocate, was not subject to such demands for information under the Income Tax Ordinance. The petition was allowed, reaffirming the rights of individuals against unwarranted notices from tax authorities. |
| Summary |
In the case of Writ Petition No. 2346 of 2012, the Lahore High Court addressed the legality of a notice issued under Section 176 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001. The petitioner, Muhammad Munir Piracha, an advocate, challenged the notice which demanded detailed information regarding his income tax return for the financial years 2010 and 2011. The court examined the provisions of the Income Tax Ordinance and concluded that the notice lacked a lawful basis, as it failed to indicate any purpose for the information request, such as amending the assessment. The decision emphasized the importance of legal protections available to individuals against arbitrary actions by tax authorities. The ruling not only upheld the petitioner's rights but also clarified the procedural requirements for tax notices, reinforcing the principle that such notices must be issued within the framework of the law. This case underscores the balance between tax compliance and the rights of practitioners, particularly those not engaged in business activities. The judgment serves as a precedent for future cases involving similar disputes, ensuring that taxpayers are not subjected to undue scrutiny without proper legal justification. |
| Court |
Lahore High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
Jawad Hassan
|
| Lawyers |
Muhammad Munir Piracha,
Muhammad Ameer Malik,
Inayat Malik
|
| Petitioners |
Muhammad Munir Piracha
|
| Respondents |
Deputy Commissioner Inland Revenue, Audit-II, Rawalpindi
|
| Citations |
2021 SLD 2612,
2021 PTD 1861,
(2022) 125 TAX 312
|
| Other Citations |
Chenab Flour and General Mills v. Federation of Pakistan and others PLD 2021 Lah. 343,
Northern Power Generation Company Limited v. Federation of Pakistan and others 2015 PTD 2052,
Reliance Commodities (Private) Ltd. v. Federation of Pakistan and others PLD 2020 Lah. 632,
Chairman Federal Land Commission v. Mst. Sanam Iqbal and others PLD 2021 Lah. 42
|
| Laws Involved |
Income Tax Ordinance, 2001,
Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
|
| Sections |
114(2),
120,
120(1),
122,
174,
176,
177(1),
199
|