Friday , August 17 2018
Breaking News
Home / Islamabad / IHC issues notice to FBR on petition filed by M/s Pakistan Mobile Communication Ltd
IHC issues notice to FBR on petition filed by M/s Pakistan Mobile Communication Ltd

IHC issues notice to FBR on petition filed by M/s Pakistan Mobile Communication Ltd

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court issued notices to M/s Pakistan Mobiles Communication Limited and the Federal Board of Revenue in a tax matter filed by the former.

IHC single bench, comprising Justice Athar Minallah, issued the notices. Earlier the bench asked the staffers to relist the matter for hearing. The bench would resume hearing on the matter by next week.

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 the 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 under the head of federal excise duty (FED).

M/s Pakistan Mobiles Communication Limited 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 Pakistan Mobiles Communication Limited submitted before the court that the impugned order was issued under mala fide intentions and had no legal standing or authority and the court may decide on relief which it deemed appropriate in this regard. It also stated that due legal course was not followed by the department in issuing the order.

M/s Pakistan Mobiles Communication Limited 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.