Latest news with #IslamabadHighCourt
Business Recorder
a day ago
- Business
- Business Recorder
IHC tax bench's order: All SOE references be routed thru ADRC
ISLAMABAD: The special tax division bench of the Islamabad High Court has ordered that all tax references filed by state-owned enterprises shall be referred to the Alternate Dispute Resolution Committee under Section 134A of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001. The state-owned enterprises contended that those tax reference applications which were instituted prior to the enactment of the Tax Laws Amendment Act, 2024 ought to be adjudicated by the Court in accordance with the procedure applicable at the time of filing of the tax reference application. However, the counsel for the Commissioner, Osama Shahid (Advocate) placed reliance upon a recent judgment of the Supreme Court of Pakistan wherein a case filed in the year 2023 (i.e., prior to the enactment of the Tax Laws Amendment Act, 2024) was referred to the mandatory alternate dispute resolution committee under Section 134A of the Ordinance. In light of the Supreme Court's judgment, the Islamabad High Court referred to matters to alternate dispute resolution committee. Tax dispute: IHC grants conditional relief to SOE Earlier, the Islamabad Bench of the ATIR had referred several appeals filed by and against state-owned enterprises to the alternate dispute resolution committee. The Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals), Islamabad has also refused to adjudicate any appeal filed by a state-owned enterprise in light of the Supreme Court's judgment. It appears that the only recourse available to a state-owned enterprise in case of a tax dispute is the alternate dispute resolution mechanism provided under Section 134A of the Ordinance regardless of whether the dispute initiated prior to or after the enactment of the Tax Laws Amendment Act, 2024. It is pertinent to note that several state-owned enterprises have also assailed the vires of the Tax Laws Amendment Act, 2024 before the Islamabad High Court by filing writ petitions which are currently sub judice. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Business Recorder
Senate passes Civil Courts (Amendment) Bill, 2025
ISLAMABAD: The Upper House of the Parliament on Friday passed the Civil Courts (Amendment) Bill, 2025, which provides that the appeals against the orders of the civil courts would only go to district courts — while the last day of the 350th Senate session was marked with apparent disinterest of lawmakers amidst the absence of Senate leadership — before the House was prorogued. In the absence of chairman and deputy chairman Senate, Irfan Siddiqui from Pakistan Muslim League Nawaz (PML-N) presided over the Senate session. Following the absence of Law Minister Azam Tarar, Climate Change State Minister Shezra Mansab presented the Civil Courts (Amendment) Bill, 2025, which received criticism from the Opposition Leader in Senate Shibli Faraz. 'The state minister does not know, at all, what this bill is all about. It would have been better had the law minister been here to present this bill,' he said. The bill was finally presented in and passed by the House. Already passed by the National Assembly, the bill now seeks President Asif Ali Zardari's ascent to become a law. According to the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Civil Courts (Amendment) Bill, 2025, the prices of the properties are ostensibly high in Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT), and valuation of most of the regular first appeals, against orders / decrees of civil courts, is more than 25,000 rupees due to which pendency on appellate side of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) has increased manifolds. Under Section 18(1)(a) of the West Pakistan Civil Courts Ordinance, 1962, the IHC has pecuniary, appellate jurisdiction exceeding Rs 2.5 million. 'By virtue of the Punjab Civil Courts (Amendment) Act, 2016, the Lahore High Court has already enhanced its appellate, pecuniary jurisdiction from 2.5 million rupees to 50 million rupees. However, pecuniary, appellate jurisdiction of Islamabad High Court remained the same i,e. 2.5 million rupees. In order to decrease burden of litigation on appellate side of Islamabad High Court, there is need to make district courts the forum to entertain appeals arising out from decrees or orders of civil judges,' says the Statement of Objects and Reasons of this bill. New bills; Civil Servants (Amendment) Bill, 2025, Pakistan Navy (Amendment) Bill, 2025, Federal Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education (Amendment) Bill, 2025, Extradition (Amendment) Bill, 2025, Pakistan Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2025, and Anti-Dumping Duties (Amendment) Bill, 2025 were moved in the House and referred to relevant standing committees. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Express Tribune
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
Objection to plea for Imran's parole stays
The Islamabad High Court on Friday issued its written order on a petition filed by Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P) Chief Minister Ali Amin Gandapur for release of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan on parole, saying that the objections raised by the Registrar Office were still unaddressed. CM Gandapur had moved the application for the release of Imran, who had been convicted in the £190 million case, could be targeted by Indian drones while in Adiala jail. The petition was heard by the IHC Acting Chief Justice Sardar Sarfaraz Dogar. The Registrar Office raised the objections that application was not filed by the convict himself and asked how could such a relief be sought for another person. Second, the office said that the person for whom the relief was sought had not been made party to the case. Imran was convicted in the reference moved by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB). The Registrar Office also said that in the petition, Nab had also not been made a party to the case, in the application for the parole release of a convicted person.
Express Tribune
22-05-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
IHC seeks details of precedents in court martial cases
The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Thursday sought previous judicial precedents, where details of the court martial proceedings were provided to the court. IHC Justice Khadim Hussain Soomro heard the plea for the production of the details of the charge sheet against former Pakistan Air Force (PAF) officer Air Marshal (retd) Jawad Saeed, who had been given 14-year jail term by a military court for leaking sensitive information. The petitioner's lawyer Abdul Waheed Advocate, besides the additional attorney general and the PAF legal officials appeared in the court on Thursday. During the hearing, the PAF officials did not present the record of the court martial proceedings and the charge sheet against Jawad Saeed. The PAF officials told the court that according to the PAF Act, the record of the sentence given and the record of the charge sheet could not be provided. The petitioner's lawyer said that this had never happened before under their own law. However, the PAF officials denied that claim. The petitioner's lawyer pleaded to the court that injustice had been committee in the case against Jawad Saeed, adding that neither he was given the lawyer of his choice, nor the record. He said that Jawad Saeed's family was also not informed. Justice Soomro told the petitioner's lawyer to present court precedents at the next hearing in which the record had been provided in such a case. The lawyer replied that he would present the Supreme Court's decisions and court precedents, adding that full bench judgments were available in similar cases. Justice Soomro asked the lawyer to present the court precedents in the form of para-wise comments and adjourned further hearing of the matter until June 17.
Business Recorder
22-05-2025
- Politics
- Business Recorder
‘Judges' transfer issue will be resolved once IHC seniority dispute is settled'
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court was asked that once the issue of seniority is decided in favour of Islamabad High Court (IHC) then the judges' transfer case will be resolved by itself. A five-member SC Constitutional Bench, headed by Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, on Wednesday, heard the petitions of IHC five judges, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan, and Karachi and Lahore Bar Associations. Faisal Siddiqui, appearing on behalf of Karachi Bar Association, argued that the matter before the bench is sensitive, and can be solved through two ways. Firstly, interpreting the constitution in view of independence of judiciary, but here judges are versus judges, and secondly, enhance the comity of judges and reduce the conflict among them. He submitted that none of the chief justices of the High Courts were consulted before the initiation of process for the transfer of judges, while chief justice of Pakistan was never told about the seniority issue. He contended this is not only malice of fact, but the malice of fact as well. The CJP has no power to determine the seniority and the fresh oath of judges transferred from provincial High Courts to the IHC. At the outset of the hearing, advocate Idrees Ashraf, representing founder chairman PTI Imran Khan and a lawyer, argued that the transfer under Article 200 of the constitution is temporary and not permanent. He said earlier there were provisions in 1973 Constitution that the judges will be transferred from one High Court to another for one to two years. However, after 18th Amendment this provision has been excluded from the constitution. During the proceeding, Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan, addressing Idrees, said you have filed two petitions, one on behalf of the PTI chairman and other by a lawyer. He then asked the counsel to read para 4 of the PTI petition. According to the para; 'The Judges of the Islamabad High Court are also being punished because they decided the false cases on merits registered and filed against the petitioner (Imran Khan), without 'fear or favour'. Moreover, the ex-Chief Justice of the Islamabad High Court (Justice Aamir Farooq and now rewarded by elevating him to the supreme court) was repeatedly asked to recuse himself from the petitioner's cases but he refused to do so and when the Judges of the Islamabad High Court made a representation to the ex-Chief Justice of the IHC, however, the same was dismissed forthwith and a fresh seniority list was issued whereas, the senior puisne judge was demoted from his position and a freshly transferred judge was put into the senior most position.' Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
