ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) heard some important tax matters during fourth week of March and dated the hearing on the matters in office after issuing directions to parties.
The IHC benches comprising Justice Aamer Farooq and Justice Athar Minallah heard these cases. Couples of cases were relisted.
A single bench of the IHC dated in office the hearing of M/s Fauji Fertilizer Company Limited’s tax matter with directives for the submission of record by the next date of hearing.
The bench comprising of Justice Aamer Farooq heard the case and adjourned it seeking provision of more record on the matter.
The same bench also heard the cases filed by M/s SHV Energy Pakistan (Private) Limited and M/s Saudi Pak Industrial and Agricultural Investment Company.
M/s SHV Energy Pakistan had filed the reference in which the company had challenged a show cause notice issued by the Large Taxpayers Unit, Islamabad.
The appellant had challenged the act of recovery of said amount by commissioner Inland Revenue of Large Taxpayer’s Unit, Islamabad.
ATIR was also made respondent in the case as the tribunal had sustained departmental decision regarding issuance of show cause notice and demand of recovery of outstanding tax amount in head of federal excise duty (FED).
M/s SHV Energy Pakistan had prayed the court that FBR office had issued a recovery notice to the company which did not hold lawful grounds.
The appellant had prayed the court to declare the act as illegal and without any lawful authority and an interim stay may be granted against recovery proceedings.
M/s SHV Energy Pakistan had also mentioned that departmental obligations were not met amid processing the notice of recovery demand while later the adjudication did not address grievances of the appellant.
IHC single bench comprising Justice Athar Minallah heard case of M/s Pakistan Mobiles Communication Limited.
M/s Pakistan Mobiles Communication Limited had filed the reference in which the company had challenged a show cause notice issued by the Large Taxpayers Unit, Islamabad.
The appellant had challenged the act of recovery of said amount by Commissioner Inland Revenue of Large Taxpayer’s Unit, Islamabad.
