Modifications to orders for accuracy: IR Commissioner holds authority under Section 221(1) of IT legislation, confirms SC
Unleashing the Supreme Court's Ruling:
SITUATION UPDATE: The Supreme Court has set the records straight on the Commissioner Inland Revenue's jurisdiction, affirming that they can amend orders under Section 221(1) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, to rectify any glaring errors apparent from the record. This ruling came in a 24-page judgment authored by Justice Munib Akhtar, setting aside the judgments of the Lahore High Court (LHC) and Islamabad High Court (IHC).
IN THE HEART OF THE MATTER: The Supreme Court overturned the decisions of the LHC and IHC, concluding that tax references related to the deemed assessment order fall under the first part of the mentioned section, implying that the Commissioner indeed possesses the power to rectify mistakes apparent on the record. This power, the court held, is not boundless but is strictly limited to rectifying errors that are apparent from the record.
RULING IN DETAIL: Justice Munib Akhtar, along with fellow justices Ayesha A Malik and Shahid Waheed, declared that the Commissioner has the jurisdiction to amend orders to correct errors, as per the law. They further confirmed that the Commissioner 'did' apply their mind while making the deemed assessment orders. The error made by the High Courts was to conflate the two deeming provisions, leading them to conclude that there was no application of mind by the Commissioner and that the mistake always lay with the taxpayers.
TAX REFERENCES AT THE FOREFRONT: Most of the matters in question stemmed from the Lahore High Court, where the principal judgment was passed on 27.04.2022. Both High Courts reached the same conclusion, leading to these matters being heard and decided together by this judgment.
FOR A MORE DEEP DIVE: This summary provides a condensed version of the ruling. For a comprehensive understanding, it's recommended to delve into the official court records or legal databases. Keep in mind that general legal principles, such as the need to ensure taxpayers aren't unfairly prejudiced and amendments being based on clear evidence and aligning with the provisions of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, apply in these cases.
**IN DEPTH: Astonishingly, Section 122 (5A) ITO grants the IR commissioners a power that isn't boundless. Yet, the courts often challenge this jurisdiction. The Supreme Court's latest decision in CPLA 431-L/2023, however, has reaffirmed the boundaries of this power. The case is currently under review, as it involves questions of law other than the one decided by this judgment.
WANDERING INTO THE LEGAL WEEDS: The Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, typically grants the Commissioner Inland Revenue the authority to amend assessment orders under Section 221(1). The commissioner uses this power to rectify mistakes, such as errors in calculations, incorrect application of tax laws, or procedural oversights. This power is subject to the principles of natural justice and the requirement that taxpayers are not unfairly prejudiced by the amendments.
CAUTION: Any amendments should be founded on clear evidence and must align with the provisions of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001. The Supreme Court's recent ruling in 2023 reaffirmed the Commissioner's power to rectify errors or mistakes in assessments that are evident on the face of the record. For a detailed understanding of the specific cases from 2022 and 2023, consulting the official court records or legal databases is advisable.
Finance ministers should be aware that the power of the Commissioner Inland Revenue to amend orders under Section 221(1) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, has been reaffirmed by the Supreme Court. This power is not boundless but is strictly limited to rectifying errors that are apparent from the record.
The ruling also clarified that tax references related to the deemed assessment order fall under the first part of the mentioned section, implying that the Commissioner indeed possesses the power to rectify mistakes apparent on the record, provided the amendments are founded on clear evidence and align with the provisions of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001.
%20of%20IT%20legislation%2C%20confirms%20SC){kind=link}