BR100 Increased By (0.84%)
BR30 Increased By (0.71%)
KSE100 Increased By (0.69%)
KSE30 Increased By (0.71%)
AGHA 7.78 Increased By ▲ 0.03 (0.39%)
BECO 5.19 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
BML 57.60 Decreased By ▼ -1.06 (-1.81%)
BOP 34.27 Increased By ▲ 0.58 (1.72%)
CNERGY 10.93 Increased By ▲ 0.32 (3.02%)
CSIL 5.48 Increased By ▲ 0.18 (3.4%)
FCCL 54.50 Increased By ▲ 0.76 (1.41%)
FFL 16.66 Increased By ▲ 0.20 (1.22%)
FNEL 1.23 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.82%)
KEL 7.39 Increased By ▲ 0.11 (1.51%)
KOSM 5.79 Increased By ▲ 0.15 (2.66%)
LOTCHEM 29.83 Increased By ▲ 0.18 (0.61%)
MLCF 95.75 Decreased By ▼ -0.61 (-0.63%)
NBP 204.89 Increased By ▲ 1.36 (0.67%)
NCPL 57.70 Increased By ▲ 0.85 (1.5%)
NPL 69.50 Increased By ▲ 2.19 (3.25%)
OGDC 318.50 Increased By ▲ 0.28 (0.09%)
PACE 10.88 Increased By ▲ 0.25 (2.35%)
PAEL 42.95 Increased By ▲ 1.18 (2.82%)
PIBTL 16.90 Increased By ▲ 0.09 (0.54%)
PPL 222.01 Increased By ▲ 1.84 (0.84%)
PRL 52.29 Increased By ▲ 3.24 (6.61%)
PTC 71.32 Increased By ▲ 1.31 (1.87%)
SSGC 29.30 Increased By ▲ 0.16 (0.55%)
TBL 9.90 Increased By ▲ 0.13 (1.33%)
TELE 8.90 Increased By ▲ 0.08 (0.91%)
TPL 17.80 Increased By ▲ 0.63 (3.67%)
TPLP 12.90 Increased By ▲ 0.39 (3.12%)
TREET 22.83 Increased By ▲ 0.24 (1.06%)
TRG 59.95 Decreased By ▼ -0.27 (-0.45%)

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has recently adjudicated three income tax reference applications filed by a company registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) under section 42 of the Companies Act, 2017.

The company, which operates schools affiliated with a private housing society, contended that, despite the absence of the Commissioner’s approval under section 2(36) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 (Ordinance), it is nonetheless entitled to claim a tax credit under section 100C of the Ordinance for the tax years 2015, 2016, and 2017.

The company’s argument was based on the assertion that its case fell under section 100C(2)(a) of the Ordinance, thereby obviating the need to meet any further conditions for availing the full 100% tax credit. Additionally, the company argued that its registration with the SECP as a non-profit entity should be deemed sufficient to entitle it to the tax credit under section 100C.

Initially, the IHC admitted the company’s tax references and granted an interim injunction against the recovery of taxes. However, when the case was argued at length, the IHC concurred with the submissions made by the Commissioner’s legal counsel, Osama Shahid (Advocate), and ruled that, notwithstanding the company’s registration status with the SECP, in order to avail tax credit under section 100C of the Ordinance, the company was required to obtain the Commissioner’s approval under section 2(36) of the Ordinance.

The failure to fulfill this essential condition resulted in the company being held liable for tax, declared by Islamabad High Court.

The section 100C of the Ordinance has been subjected to frequent amendments by the legislature, which have raised significant concerns regarding its interpretation and application. Nevertheless, with this recent judgment from the Islamabad High Court, it is hoped that the lingering ambiguity surrounding section 100C of the Ordinance will be resolved, providing much-needed clarity.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2025

Comments

Comments are closed for this article.