PRESENT:
Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Abdur Rahman.
VS
The Commissione Inland Revenue and Others (Respondent)
Petitioner(s) by: Mr. Uzair Shoro, Advocate.
Respondent(s) by: Mr. Zakia Jatoi holding brief for Mr. Ameer Bakhsh Metlo, Advocate.
Law: Federal Excise Act, 2005
Sections: 38
Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001
Sections: 134A
This Reference Application has been filed by Pakistan International Airlines Corporation against order dated 29.06.2017 passed by the Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue, Karachi in FE No. 22/KB/2014. PIAC is a State Owned Enterprise in terms of State Owned Enterprises (Governance and Operation) Act, 2023 and pursuant to Section 38 of Federal Excise Act, 2005 read with 134A of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 a mechanism has been provided for State Owned Enterprises ("SOE") to approach FBR in respect of adverse orders passed by the Inland Revenue Department. The most significant and the relevant amendment made, which in our view is fully applicable to the present Applicant, is that now it ismandatoryfor SOE to go for ADR, whereas the limit of Rs. 50 Million is also not applicable.
When confronted as to the above provision Counsel for PIAC / Applicant, submits that instructions are awaited. Whereas,
Respondent's Counsel submits that even the Honourable Supreme Court has referred the matters filed by the Commissioner Inland Revenue to the Dispute Resolution Committee. He has placed on record copies of such orders passed inCivil Petition No. 2106 of 2024(Commissioner Inland Revenue, Corporate Zone, Regional Tax Officer, Islamabad v. M/s Islamabad
Electric Supply Company Limited, (IESCO), Islamabad),Civil Appeals No. 649, 650, 651, 652 of 2022(M/s. State Life Insurance Corporation of Pakistan v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Karachi & others)and Civil Petition Nos. 886-K, 887-K and 888-K of 2023(M/s. Trading Corporation of Pakistan v. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Karachi).
In view of such position, this Reference Application is disposed of, whereas, in terms of Section 38 of Federal Excise Act, 2005 read with 134A of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, matter stands referred to FBR to form a Committee as required under the new amended provision and till such time the matter is finally decided by the said Committee, no coercive measures be adopted against the Applicant for recovery. Once a decision has been given by the Committee, the Applicant if aggrieved, may seek further remedy in accordance with law.
With these observations, this Reference Application is hereby disposed of.
Disclaimer / Note: We have reproduced the judgment for facilitation of readers; however, the readers must study the original or certified copy of the above said judgment before referring it in any Court of Law. The judgment as reproduced above is a reported judgment available in law magazines and journals namely: 2026 PTD 648