AIRLINK 80.60 Increased By ▲ 1.19 (1.5%)
BOP 5.26 Decreased By ▼ -0.07 (-1.31%)
CNERGY 4.52 Increased By ▲ 0.14 (3.2%)
DFML 34.50 Increased By ▲ 1.31 (3.95%)
DGKC 78.90 Increased By ▲ 2.03 (2.64%)
FCCL 20.85 Increased By ▲ 0.32 (1.56%)
FFBL 33.78 Increased By ▲ 2.38 (7.58%)
FFL 9.70 Decreased By ▼ -0.15 (-1.52%)
GGL 10.11 Decreased By ▼ -0.14 (-1.37%)
HBL 117.85 Decreased By ▼ -0.08 (-0.07%)
HUBC 137.80 Increased By ▲ 3.70 (2.76%)
HUMNL 7.05 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (0.71%)
KEL 4.59 Decreased By ▼ -0.08 (-1.71%)
KOSM 4.56 Decreased By ▼ -0.18 (-3.8%)
MLCF 37.80 Increased By ▲ 0.36 (0.96%)
OGDC 137.20 Increased By ▲ 0.50 (0.37%)
PAEL 22.80 Decreased By ▼ -0.35 (-1.51%)
PIAA 26.57 Increased By ▲ 0.02 (0.08%)
PIBTL 6.76 Decreased By ▼ -0.24 (-3.43%)
PPL 114.30 Increased By ▲ 0.55 (0.48%)
PRL 27.33 Decreased By ▼ -0.19 (-0.69%)
PTC 14.59 Decreased By ▼ -0.16 (-1.08%)
SEARL 57.00 Decreased By ▼ -0.20 (-0.35%)
SNGP 66.75 Decreased By ▼ -0.75 (-1.11%)
SSGC 11.00 Decreased By ▼ -0.09 (-0.81%)
TELE 9.11 Decreased By ▼ -0.12 (-1.3%)
TPLP 11.46 Decreased By ▼ -0.10 (-0.87%)
TRG 70.23 Decreased By ▼ -1.87 (-2.59%)
UNITY 25.20 Increased By ▲ 0.38 (1.53%)
WTL 1.33 Decreased By ▼ -0.07 (-5%)
BR100 7,629 Increased By 103 (1.37%)
BR30 24,842 Increased By 192.5 (0.78%)
KSE100 72,743 Increased By 771.4 (1.07%)
KSE30 24,034 Increased By 284.8 (1.2%)

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists (PFUJ) has termed the timelines/deadlines to the income tax authorities to proceed against Justice Qazi Faez Isa's spouse and children illegal under Section 116 and/or other related provisions of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001.

The PFUJ, through Rasheed A Rizvi, on Tuesday filed a petition, urging to apex court to review paras 3 to 11 of its order dated June 19, 2020.

A 10-member bench, headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial on 19-06-20 had quashed the Presidential Reference against Justice Qazi Faez Isa, and held the proceedings before the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) as having abated.

Rasheed A Rizvi, who filed a review petition on behalf of PFUJ, contended that after the 19th June order, the SJC has become functus officio for the purpose of this case. He said: "How could, therefore such, a body take notice of any future report against Justice Faez"?

He submitted that under Article 209 of the Constitution, it was clear that the SJC was not a continuing body and was constituted for every individual case that was brought before it.

It is on receipt of a Presidential Reference or in case of assumption of suo moto jurisdiction by the SJC that the body (SJC) is constituted for a particular case.

"The counsel argued: "This, being the case, how could an un-constituted SJC or its chairman entertain a report?" questioned the journalist body.

That it is the constitutional prerogative of the SJC to assume suo moto jurisdiction against a judge of the superior courts, under its own procedure, on receipt of a valid and substantial complaint.

Such jurisdiction cannot be subject to directions by any court. "The SJC also has no jurisdiction to probe or inquire into the assets and properties of the spouse and children of a judge because its jurisdiction is limited to the extent of physical or mental incapacity of a judge or a case of misconduct against a judge. "Spouse and children of a judge do not fall within the scope and ambit of exercise of jurisdiction.

"The wife and children of Justice Qazi Faez are entitled to 'due process' before the FBR and other tax authorities as provided under Article 10A of the Constitution.

"Giving directions /timelines/ deadlines constitute serious inroads being made into the jurisdiction and proceedings by the tax authorities, which could adversely affect the rights and protections afforded to the spouse and children of the learned judge by the 'due process' under tax law read with Article 10A of the Constitution."

"The directions/ observations/contents of paras 3 to 11 are unnecessary, superfluous, contradictory, excessive and unlawful, and thus, liable to be deleted.

The directions/ observations/ contents of paras 3 to 11 of the Order, constitute mistake and error apparent on the face of the record, and are thus liable to be reviewed and deleted".

Copyright Business Recorder, 2020

Comments

Comments are closed.