A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: 8192

Message: Return type of CI_Session_database_driver::open($save_path, $name) should either be compatible with SessionHandlerInterface::open(string $path, string $name): bool, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice

Filename: drivers/Session_database_driver.php

Line Number: 126

Backtrace:

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/application/controllers/Blog.php
Line: 24
Function: __construct

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/index.php
Line: 292
Function: require_once

A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: 8192

Message: Return type of CI_Session_database_driver::close() should either be compatible with SessionHandlerInterface::close(): bool, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice

Filename: drivers/Session_database_driver.php

Line Number: 261

Backtrace:

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/application/controllers/Blog.php
Line: 24
Function: __construct

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/index.php
Line: 292
Function: require_once

A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: 8192

Message: Return type of CI_Session_database_driver::read($session_id) should either be compatible with SessionHandlerInterface::read(string $id): string|false, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice

Filename: drivers/Session_database_driver.php

Line Number: 143

Backtrace:

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/application/controllers/Blog.php
Line: 24
Function: __construct

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/index.php
Line: 292
Function: require_once

A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: 8192

Message: Return type of CI_Session_database_driver::write($session_id, $session_data) should either be compatible with SessionHandlerInterface::write(string $id, string $data): bool, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice

Filename: drivers/Session_database_driver.php

Line Number: 193

Backtrace:

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/application/controllers/Blog.php
Line: 24
Function: __construct

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/index.php
Line: 292
Function: require_once

A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: 8192

Message: Return type of CI_Session_database_driver::destroy($session_id) should either be compatible with SessionHandlerInterface::destroy(string $id): bool, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice

Filename: drivers/Session_database_driver.php

Line Number: 278

Backtrace:

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/application/controllers/Blog.php
Line: 24
Function: __construct

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/index.php
Line: 292
Function: require_once

A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: 8192

Message: Return type of CI_Session_database_driver::gc($maxlifetime) should either be compatible with SessionHandlerInterface::gc(int $max_lifetime): int|false, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice

Filename: drivers/Session_database_driver.php

Line Number: 306

Backtrace:

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/application/controllers/Blog.php
Line: 24
Function: __construct

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/index.php
Line: 292
Function: require_once

A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: ini_set(): Session ini settings cannot be changed after headers have already been sent

Filename: Session/Session.php

Line Number: 281

Backtrace:

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/application/controllers/Blog.php
Line: 24
Function: __construct

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/index.php
Line: 292
Function: require_once

A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: session_set_cookie_params(): Session cookie parameters cannot be changed after headers have already been sent

Filename: Session/Session.php

Line Number: 293

Backtrace:

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/application/controllers/Blog.php
Line: 24
Function: __construct

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/index.php
Line: 292
Function: require_once

A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: ini_set(): Session ini settings cannot be changed after headers have already been sent

Filename: Session/Session.php

Line Number: 303

Backtrace:

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/application/controllers/Blog.php
Line: 24
Function: __construct

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/index.php
Line: 292
Function: require_once

A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: ini_set(): Session ini settings cannot be changed after headers have already been sent

Filename: Session/Session.php

Line Number: 313

Backtrace:

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/application/controllers/Blog.php
Line: 24
Function: __construct

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/index.php
Line: 292
Function: require_once

A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: ini_set(): Session ini settings cannot be changed after headers have already been sent

Filename: Session/Session.php

Line Number: 314

Backtrace:

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/application/controllers/Blog.php
Line: 24
Function: __construct

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/index.php
Line: 292
Function: require_once

A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: ini_set(): Session ini settings cannot be changed after headers have already been sent

Filename: Session/Session.php

Line Number: 315

Backtrace:

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/application/controllers/Blog.php
Line: 24
Function: __construct

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/index.php
Line: 292
Function: require_once

A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: ini_set(): Session ini settings cannot be changed after headers have already been sent

Filename: Session/Session.php

Line Number: 316

Backtrace:

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/application/controllers/Blog.php
Line: 24
Function: __construct

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/index.php
Line: 292
Function: require_once

A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: session_set_save_handler(): Session save handler cannot be changed after headers have already been sent

Filename: Session/Session.php

Line Number: 107

Backtrace:

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/application/controllers/Blog.php
Line: 24
Function: __construct

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/index.php
Line: 292
Function: require_once

A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: session_start(): Session cannot be started after headers have already been sent

Filename: Session/Session.php

Line Number: 140

Backtrace:

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/application/controllers/Blog.php
Line: 24
Function: __construct

File: /home/lawyrspk02/public_html/index.php
Line: 292
Function: require_once

Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), S. 10-- - Lawyers of Pakistan

Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), S. 10--

Citation Name : 2015 SCMR 380 SUPREME-COURT
Side Appellant : UNITED BANK LIMITED
Side Opponent : NOOR-UN-NISA
Ss. 8, 39, 42 & 54---Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), S. 10---Suit for possession, cancellation of documents, declaration, injunction and mesne profit---Non evacuee status of property---Forged and fabricated "Provisional Transfer Order" (PTO) and "Permanent Transfer Deed" (PTD )---Belated claim of ownership---Respondents filed civil suit against the appellant-bank claiming ownership of disputed property on the basis of a "Provisional Transfer Order" (PTO) and "Permanent Transfer Deed" (PTD ) showing disputed property having been transferred to their predecessor-in-interest from the settlement department---Appellant-Bank claimed that it was the owner of the disputed property on the strength of a sale deed, and contended that disputed property was of non-evacuee nature thus it could not have been transferred to the predecessor-in-interest of respondents---Validity---Prior to filing of suit by the respondents, the appellant-bank had initiated eviction proceedings against the predecessor-in-interest of respondents, and succeeded in getting an eviction order, which attained finality---Eviction proceedings remained sub-judice before the courts for over twelve years, and at no time during such period respondents made any mention of the "Provisional Transfer Order" (PTO) and "Permanent Transfer Deed" (PTD ) in favour of their predecessor-in-interest---Civil suit claiming ownership of disputed property was filed by respondents much subsequent to the eviction order---Appellant-bank produced in court the original registered sale deed to establish their clear title over the disputed property---Committee formed to verify the alleged "Permanent Transfer Deed" (PTD ) in favour of predecessor-in-interest of respondents concluded that the same was obtained through fraud in connivance with officials of the settlement department; that entries existing in the PTD register regarding disputed property were fabricated and bore forged and fabricated signatures, thus the "Permanent Transfer Deed" (PTD ) in favour of predecessor-in-interest of respondents was bogus---With respect to the "Provisional Transfer Order" (PTO), the said order did not form part of any record of the settlement department, for the reason that no file of disputed property was ever opened or maintained in the settlement department for treating the property as an evacuee---Moreover, said order did not contain even the material particulars, the name of evacuee owner, the area of the property, its constructed area; its annual rental value as per DVL or any other document about the entitlement or status of respondents' predecessor-in-interest being an evacuee---"Provisional Transfer Order" (PTO) and "Permanent Transfer Deed" (PTD ) were also found blank in material particulars such as the name of the evacuee owner of the property, the assessed price of the property by the settlement department as per the policy in vogue; details of its payments, if any, made by the respondents' predecessor and its mode---Even the amount of public dues and scrutiny fee was not mentioned in the copy of "Permanent Transfer Deed"---Relevant gazette notification also showed the status of disputed property as being non-evacuee property---Suit filed by respondents was dismissed---Appeal was disposed of accordingly.


Citation Name : 2015 PTD 2335 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Side Appellant : COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE
Side Opponent : ISLAM STEEL MILLS
Ss. 161 & 160---Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979) Ss. 50 & 52----Failure to pay tax collected or deducted---Deduction of tax at source---Interpretation of S. 161 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001--­Similarity of S. 50(4) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 with S. 161 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001---Section 50(4) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 must be read with S. 52 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 and likewise S. 161 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 must be read in conjunction with S. 161 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, for said provisions, when read together completed the scheme envisaged by the Legislature---Reading of the two provisions did bring forth an ineluctable fact that they were similar in material particulars and were meant for the same purpose and only difference was that S. 161 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 made a reference to Divisions II and III and Chapter XII of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 and was thus more elaborate in its application whereas S. 50(4) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 was self- contained and the payments in respect of which deductions were to be made were enumerated therein---Section 161 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 was in fact more rights-based in favour of the taxpayer and it conferred a right to be heard and did not make taxpayer liable for the recovery of tax to be deducted if such tax had meanwhile been paid by the person---High Court observed that ratio decidendi of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Messrs Bilz (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Multan and another (2002 PTD 1), including the principle of law it enunciated, and the intelligible criteria it lay down to be followed, equally applied, with greater force, to cases under S. 161 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001.


Citation Name : 2015 PTD 681 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Side Appellant : COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
Side Opponent : DOABA PLASTICS INDUSTRIES (PVT.) LTD.
Ss.121(1)(d), 120, 177, 122 & 133---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.189---Reference to High Court---Best judgment assessment---Audit proceedings---Failure to produce documents or records required to be maintained---Validity of order for best-judgment assessment under S.121(1)(d) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 in presence of existing assessment order under S.120 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001----Scope----Question before the High Court was whether provisions of S.121(1)(d) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 could be invoked for non-submission of documents during audit proceedings, in presence of an assessment order under S.120 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001----Contention of department was inter alia that such an order could be passed in light of judgment of Sindh High Court in Messrs Sarah Construction Co. v. Taxation Officer-4, Audit-2 Karachi and others (2013 PTD 682)----Held, that High Court in Commissioner Inland Revenue (Legal) v. Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals) and others (2013 PTD 837) had answered the said legal proposition / question of law against the Department and had held that an order under S.121 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 for best judgment assessment could not be passed in presence of an assessment order under S.120 of the Ordinance, and said judgment of Lahore High Court had been upheld by the Supreme Court of Pakistan vide order dated 9-5-2013 in Civil Petition No. 526 of 2013; therefore, contention of Department had no force in view of Art.189 of the Constitution---High Court observed that judgment of the Sindh High Court in Messrs Sarah Construction Co. v. Taxation Officer-4, Audit-2 Karachi and others (2013 PTD 682) was per incuriam for having placed reliance on irrelevant provisions of law due to lack of proper assistance---High Court held that order under S.121(1)(d) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, could therefore not be passed in presence of an assessment under S.120 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001---Reference was answered, accordingly.


Citation Name : 2015 PTD 1805 INLAND REVENUE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OF PAKISTAN
Side Appellant : C.I.R., ZONE-VII, R.T.O., LAHORE
Side Opponent : T.U. PLASTIC INDUSTRIES CO., LTD., LAHORE
Ss. 8, 11, 33, 34, 46 & 73---Inadmissible transactions---Input tax claim on plant and machinery---Denial of claim---Registered person/ company, imported machinery for the business purposes, and paid sales tax at import stage, which was claimed by company as input tax---Same was disallowed by the Assessing Authority on the plea that the plant and machinery in question, were not used for the purpose of manufacturing of artificial leather, which was the principal activity---Appellate Authority vacated that order of the Assessing Authority---Validity---Appellate Authority while vacating the order of Assessing Authority, had observed that the machinery imported, was duly installed at the business premises of the company; and machinery so installed was directly producing goods for taxable supplies as per provisions of S.8 of Sales Tax Act, 1990---No reason existed to disturb the order of Appellate Authority which was found to be in accordance with law; and was supported by judgment reported as 2002 PTD (Trib.) 111---Order of Appellate Authority was maintained by the Tribunal in circumstances.

Related Case Laws

slide3

slide3

slide1

slide1

Difference between courts and tribunals (PLD 2020…

Difference between courts and tribunals (PLD 2020 SINDH 284)

P L D 2020 Peshawar 52 (a) Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Continuation…

P L D 2020 Peshawar 52 (a) Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Continuation of Laws in the Erstwhile Provincially Administered…

2020 P Cr. L J 8399(Appreciation of evidence,Benefit…

2020 P Cr. L J 8399(Appreciation of evidence,Benefit of doubt---Contradictory evidence)

2020 P Cr. L J 8399(Appreciation of evidence,Benefit…

2020 P Cr. L J 8399(Appreciation of evidence,Benefit of doubt---Contradictory evidence)

Defence Saving Certificates Rules, 1966

Defence Saving Certificates Rules, 1966

Suit for declaration seeking change in date of birth

Suit for declaration seeking change in date of birth

Sentence in case of conviction of several offences…

Sentence in case of conviction of several offences at one trial-

calling for further inquiry

calling for further inquiry

-International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

-International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

rioting armed with deadly weapon, common object and…

rioting armed with deadly weapon, common object and abetment

Contact Us