BR100 Decreased By (-0.16%)
BR30 Decreased By (-0.26%)
KSE100 Decreased By (-0.21%)
KSE30 Decreased By (-0.28%)
AGHA 6.56 Increased By ▲ 0.04 (0.61%)
BECO 4.27 Decreased By ▼ -0.05 (-1.16%)
BML 57.51 Increased By ▲ 0.47 (0.82%)
BOP 29.08 Decreased By ▼ -0.17 (-0.58%)
CNERGY 12.52 Increased By ▲ 0.13 (1.05%)
CSIL 5.11 Decreased By ▼ -0.03 (-0.58%)
FCCL 52.12 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (0.1%)
FFL 14.03 Increased By ▲ 0.02 (0.14%)
FNEL 1.14 Decreased By ▼ -0.02 (-1.72%)
KEL 6.05 Increased By ▲ 0.09 (1.51%)
KOSM 5.38 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
LOTCHEM 26.38 Decreased By ▼ -0.22 (-0.83%)
MLCF 90.63 Decreased By ▼ -0.32 (-0.35%)
NBP 158.42 Decreased By ▼ -2.32 (-1.44%)
NCPL 50.97 Decreased By ▼ -0.26 (-0.51%)
NPL 54.98 Decreased By ▼ -1.01 (-1.8%)
OGDC 306.12 Decreased By ▼ -2.54 (-0.82%)
PACE 9.78 Increased By ▲ 0.21 (2.19%)
PAEL 33.96 Increased By ▲ 0.23 (0.68%)
PIBTL 13.52 Decreased By ▼ -0.06 (-0.44%)
PPL 218.94 Increased By ▲ 0.59 (0.27%)
PRL 93.07 Increased By ▲ 1.95 (2.14%)
PTC 58.84 Decreased By ▼ -1.25 (-2.08%)
SSGC 23.06 Increased By ▲ 0.02 (0.09%)
TBL 9.33 Increased By ▲ 0.37 (4.13%)
TELE 7.17 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
TPL 20.17 Increased By ▲ 0.76 (3.92%)
TPLP 12.38 Increased By ▲ 0.58 (4.92%)
TREET 23.72 Increased By ▲ 1.47 (6.61%)
TRG 55.29 Increased By ▲ 0.07 (0.13%)

LAHORE: To consider grounds for the factual determination of the amount claimed for refund in income tax returns is not permissible under the constitutional jurisdiction of this court, observed the Lahore High Court.

The Lahore High Court held that the refund amount claimed in income tax returns required factual determination of the amount claimed; hence, not permissible under the constitutional jurisdiction of this court to consider.

The Lahore High Court held that the refund claim for income tax returns being required factual determination of the amount claimed does not fall with the jurisdiction of this court.

The court passed this order in an appeal of Lahore Electric Supply Company Limited (Lesco) and advised the appellant to raise the refund claim before the Commissioner Inland Revenue where its appeal is already pending.

The court; however, directed the Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals) to decide the matter within two months.

The appellant’s counsel contended before the court that respondent had issued a notice demanding an amount of rupees 205,578,550.

He said the refund claim of the appellant for larger amount is still pending to be undetermined by the respondents.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2025

Comments

Comments are closed for this article.