- Advertisement -
ISLAMABAD, Jan 19 (APP):The Federal Constitutional Court on Monday adjourned the hearing of the super tax case—comprising more than 2,000 petitions—until Tuesday, January 20, after extensive arguments were presented on key legal questions.
The three-member bench, headed by Chief Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan and comprising Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi and Justice Syed Arshad Hussain Shah, heard arguments from lawyers representing various companies and sectors.
Advocate Farogh Naseem, appearing on behalf of several corporations, argued that there was significant ambiguity regarding the imposition of the super tax, its effective date, and the varying rates applicable to different sectors.
He submitted that under the Finance Act 2023, Section 4C of the Income Tax Ordinance was applied retrospectively from 2022, whereas the super tax rate for banks up to 2022 was 4 percent, which was later increased to 10 percent under the Finance Bill 2023.
Farogh Naseem said that if the FBR had any position to present, it should do so before the court, and such public statements were inappropriate.
During the hearing, Advocate Adnan Haider Randhawa—representing internet companies—submitted that prior to the Finance Bill 2022, super tax had been collected for an 18-month period, even though a tax year legally comprises 12 months. Chief Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan questioned how an 18-month tax demand could be justified when the tax year is strictly 12 months.
Representing the FBR, Advocate Asma Hamid maintained that all taxes were imposed on the basis of a 12-month tax year, and if any taxpayer had paid excess tax, they should have filed a claim for refund. However, Adnan Haider contended that while Section 4C became effective from July 1, 2022, internet companies were being charged special tax from January 1, 2021, which he argued was unlawful.
The court was informed that out of 150 lawyers in the case, more than 100 had completed their arguments. After the completion of Adnan Haider Randhawa’s submissions on behalf of internet companies, the bench adjourned the proceedings until Tuesday, January 20.
At the next hearing, Jamal Ahmed Sukhaira, counsel for Fauji Fertilizers, is scheduled to present his arguments.