BR100 Decreased By (-0.08%)
BR30 Increased By (0.08%)
KSE100 Decreased By (-0.11%)
KSE30 Decreased By (-0.2%)
AGHA 7.53 Decreased By ▼ -0.10 (-1.31%)
BECO 5.11 Decreased By ▼ -0.46 (-8.26%)
BML 58.30 Decreased By ▼ -1.44 (-2.41%)
BOP 34.58 Increased By ▲ 0.18 (0.52%)
CNERGY 13.68 Increased By ▲ 0.57 (4.35%)
CSIL 6.30 Decreased By ▼ -0.11 (-1.72%)
FCCL 57.55 Decreased By ▼ -0.51 (-0.88%)
FFL 16.50 Increased By ▲ 0.27 (1.66%)
FNEL 1.20 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.83%)
KEL 7.36 Decreased By ▼ -0.07 (-0.94%)
KOSM 5.98 Decreased By ▼ -0.05 (-0.83%)
LOTCHEM 27.51 Decreased By ▼ -0.16 (-0.58%)
MLCF 101.93 Decreased By ▼ -0.82 (-0.8%)
NBP 203.29 Decreased By ▼ -1.77 (-0.86%)
NCPL 60.47 Increased By ▲ 0.84 (1.41%)
NPL 69.80 Increased By ▲ 1.24 (1.81%)
OGDC 318.48 Decreased By ▼ -0.44 (-0.14%)
PACE 11.12 Increased By ▲ 0.07 (0.63%)
PAEL 42.86 Decreased By ▼ -0.24 (-0.56%)
PIBTL 16.72 Increased By ▲ 0.09 (0.54%)
PPL 230.62 Increased By ▲ 1.17 (0.51%)
PRL 76.73 Increased By ▲ 5.93 (8.38%)
PTC 71.18 Increased By ▲ 0.18 (0.25%)
SSGC 27.10 Decreased By ▼ -0.31 (-1.13%)
TBL 10.28 Decreased By ▼ -0.03 (-0.29%)
TELE 8.56 Increased By ▲ 0.03 (0.35%)
TPL 23.59 Increased By ▲ 0.53 (2.3%)
TPLP 15.45 Decreased By ▼ -0.31 (-1.97%)
TREET 24.51 Decreased By ▼ -0.20 (-0.81%)
TRG 60.09 Decreased By ▼ -0.20 (-0.33%)

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.