KARACHI: A two-member bench of the Sindh High Court (SHC), headed by Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, has directed the counsel for the petitioner to come prepared and satisfy this court about maintainability of the instant petition on the next date of hearing.
The court issued the directions on a constitutional petition filed by Ijaz Ahmed, a senior lawyer of the Sindh High Court and Supreme Court against reopening and selection of his case for audit through computer ballot by the FBR. The court also observed that prima-facie it appears that the instant petition filed on mere issuance of notices does not suffer any jurisdictional error.
The court issued notices to the tax authorities and the deputy attorney general, directing them to file their respective comments on the next date of hearing. The court also passed interim order and directed the tax department not to pass any final order till the next date hearing. The court adjourned the hearing for March 20, 2017.
During the hearing, counsel for the petitioner expressed his grievance against reopening of the case for the tax year 2011 to 2015 under section 122(5), 122(9), 176 and 177(1) and under section 182 (2) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, therefore, selection of the case of petitioner for the tax year 2015 through computer ballot by the FBR under section 214-C of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, on the grounds that a common controversy amount received by the petitioner is respect of maturity of the TDRs on which withholding tax has already been paid by the petitioner.
He further submitted that despite explained the nature of the transaction in detail the respondents intend to tax the said income again through impugned notices, the entire proceedings against the petitioner amount to abuse the process of law. Learned counsel further submitted that the issue relating to selection of the case for audit by the FBR has already been challenged in other petitions, wherein, similar notices issued by the tax department.
In support of his contention, learned counsel has placed in record copy of order passed by this court and requested that notice in the instant matter may also be issued to the respondents who shall be retrained not to take any coercive action against the petitioner pursuant to impugned notices till decision on the instant petition, whereas, instant petition may be directed to be fixed along with aforesaid petitions on the next date of hearing.
After his arguments, court issued notices to tax department and deputy attorney general directing them to file their respective comments on next date of hearing, court also directed the tax department, no final order shall be passed pursuant to such notices till next date hearing. SHC also directed counsels for the petitioner to come prepared and to satisfy this court as to maintainability of instant petition, as prima-facie it appears that instant petition has been filed on mere issuance of notices, which prima-facie, do not suffer from any jurisdictional error.
