COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/WELATH TAX COMPANIES ZONE I, LAHORE vs
This matter arises from petitions for leave to appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax/Wealth Tax Companies Zone I, Lahore, against a judgment. The core legal question concerned whether Circular No. 13 of 1997 is intra vires or ultra vires the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, alongside the issue of condonation of delay. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that it was unnecessary to address the vires of the circular as the petitions were barred by 180 days of delay. The Court ruled that internal circulation of certified copies among different authorities to decide whether to appeal does not constitute a valid ground for condoning such delay. Consequently, the petitions were dismissed as time-barred, while leaving the petitioners at liberty to pursue other available legal remedies before the appropriate forum. The key principle laid down is that administrative delay caused by internal bureaucratic consultation within government departments is insufficient to warrant the condonation of a substantial delay in filing petitions.
- Does the internal circulation of a judgment among government authorities to decide on filing an appeal constitute a valid ground for condonation of delay?
- Can petitions be dismissed as time-barred without deciding the constitutional or legal vires of an administrative circular?
- Income Tax Ordinance, 1979
ORDER
' IRSHAD HASAN KHAN, J.---It is not necessary to express any considered opinion on the basic question involved in the petitions as to whether Circular No,13 of 1997 is intra vires or ultra vires of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979. Suffice it to say that each of the petitions is barred by 180 days.
Delay is sought to be condoned on the ground that after obtaining the certified copy of the impugned judgment the same was circulated before different authorities to see as to whether appeal should be preferred in this Court or not. As soon as the decision was taken by the competent Authority, the petitions for leave to appeal were filed.
2. We are afraid, the plea hardly constitutes a valid ground for condonation of delay. Be that as it may, the petitioners shall be at liberty to avail all other remedies available to them under the law for redress of their grievance by making appropriate application before the appropriate forum.
3. With the above observation, the above petitions are dismissed being barred by time.