Step 1 of 8
Welcome!
Let's learn how to use the search features effectively.
Step 1 of 7
Welcome!
Let's learn how to use the search features effectively.
Latest Judgments (All Jurisdictions within Pakistan)
M/S. SWERA TRADERS VS THE CUSTOMS APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LAHROE.
Summary: In this case, an application has been made under section 133 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, challenging an order passed by the Appellate Tribunal, Inland Revenue, Lahore. The main legal issue under consideration in this case revolves around whether the Tribunal erred in canceling an order passed under sections 161/205 of the Income Tax Ordinance based on its previous judgment, which is believed to be in contradiction to a judgment by the Supreme Court of Pakistan. The argument is centered on whether the responsibility to withhold tax lies solely with the taxpayer or whether the income tax authorities must specify the transactions requiring withholding. The Tribunal's reasoning in its decision, which emphasized the need for three elements to be present for the income tax authorities to proceed under section 161: the taxpayer being a withholding agent, specific transactions subject to withholding, and identification of the tax liability. The Tribunal did not adequately consider the specifics of the case, such as the notice provided to the taxpayers and their failure to deduct tax. Ultimately, the Tribunal's decision was incorrect, and the orders passed by the Inland Revenue Officer and the Commissioner Inland Revenue were valid. The Tribunal was found to have erred in setting aside these orders, and the reference applications were accepted.
Lahore Feeds Ltd VS Customs,Sales Tax & Central
Summary: Dismissed--Another important factor which impactsthe decision of the reference applications is thatas many as 48 appeals filed by the applicants wereaccepted by the first appellate forum precisely onthe ground that the department did not havesufficient evidence in its hands to resort tosecondary method of valuation. Therefore, it isapparent that the assessments made by thecustoms department were not without any legaland factual basis.
MST. SHAMEEM AKHTAR VS ADJ.ETC.
Summary: The background of the case is that the petitioner and respondent No.2 were married in 1988 with certain financial arrangements, and they had a child named Muhammad Umair Tayyab. However, their relationship deteriorated, and respondent No.2 contracted a second marriage. The petitioner had previously filed various legal actions, including a suit for maintenance allowance and dowry articles, as well as appeals and writ petitions related to these matters. The main point of contention in this document is whether a DNA test is necessary to determine the parentage of Muhammad Umair Tayyab, who is now over 18 years old. The document cited relevant legal provisions, including Section 128 of Qanoon-e-Shahadat Order, 1984, which deals with the presumption of legitimacy of a child born during a valid marriage. The document also references previous legal cases and their implications for the use of DNA tests in such situations. Ultimately, the document concluded by allowing the writ petition, setting aside the order for a DNA test, and directing the parties to continue their case before the learned Judge Family Court, where it is still pending.
DUBAI ISLAMIC BANK PAKISTAN LIMITED vs MOHAMMAD IBRAHIM and another
Summary: Summary pending
HOT vs Malik ALLAHYAR KHAN and 5 others
Summary: Summary pending
MEHMOOD ANWAR through Special Attorney vs ABDUL HANAN and 3 others
Summary: Summary pending
USMAN KHAN vs Mst NASREEN and 2 others
Summary: Summary pending
MUHAMMAD NAEEM KHAN vs MUHAMMAD ISMAIL and another
Summary: Summary pending
RANA ZEESHAN AHMED VS ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE EX OFFICIO JUSTICE OF PEACE LAHORE
Summary: Summary pending.