AGL 37.72 Decreased By ▼ -0.22 (-0.58%)
AIRLINK 168.65 Increased By ▲ 13.43 (8.65%)
BOP 9.09 Increased By ▲ 0.02 (0.22%)
CNERGY 6.85 Increased By ▲ 0.13 (1.93%)
DCL 10.05 Increased By ▲ 0.52 (5.46%)
DFML 40.64 Increased By ▲ 0.33 (0.82%)
DGKC 93.24 Increased By ▲ 0.29 (0.31%)
FCCL 37.92 Decreased By ▼ -0.46 (-1.2%)
FFBL 78.72 Increased By ▲ 0.14 (0.18%)
FFL 13.46 Decreased By ▼ -0.14 (-1.03%)
HUBC 114.10 Increased By ▲ 3.91 (3.55%)
HUMNL 14.95 Increased By ▲ 0.06 (0.4%)
KEL 5.75 Increased By ▲ 0.02 (0.35%)
KOSM 8.23 Decreased By ▼ -0.24 (-2.83%)
MLCF 45.49 Decreased By ▼ -0.17 (-0.37%)
NBP 74.92 Decreased By ▼ -1.25 (-1.64%)
OGDC 192.93 Increased By ▲ 1.06 (0.55%)
PAEL 32.24 Increased By ▲ 1.76 (5.77%)
PIBTL 8.57 Increased By ▲ 0.41 (5.02%)
PPL 167.38 Increased By ▲ 0.82 (0.49%)
PRL 31.01 Increased By ▲ 1.57 (5.33%)
PTC 22.08 Increased By ▲ 2.01 (10.01%)
SEARL 100.83 Increased By ▲ 4.21 (4.36%)
TELE 8.45 Increased By ▲ 0.18 (2.18%)
TOMCL 34.84 Increased By ▲ 0.58 (1.69%)
TPLP 11.24 Increased By ▲ 1.02 (9.98%)
TREET 18.63 Increased By ▲ 0.97 (5.49%)
TRG 60.74 Decreased By ▼ -0.51 (-0.83%)
UNITY 31.98 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.03%)
WTL 1.61 Increased By ▲ 0.14 (9.52%)
BR100 11,289 Increased By 73.1 (0.65%)
BR30 34,140 Increased By 489.6 (1.45%)
KSE100 105,104 Increased By 545.3 (0.52%)
KSE30 32,554 Increased By 188.3 (0.58%)

Justice Qazi Faez Isa's counsel has contended that under Section 216 of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, returns furnished or documents produced shall be confidential and no public servant save as provided in this Ordinance may disclose any such particulars.

Munir A Malik Advocate, who represented the apex court judge, contended that under Section 216 of Income Tax Ordinance 2001, any statement made, return furnished, or accounts or documents produced under the provisions of this Ordinance shall be confidential and no public servant save as provided in this Ordinance may disclose any such particulars.

He argued that under Section 198 of Ordinance, a person who discloses any particulars in contravention of Section 216 shall commit an offence punishable on conviction with a fine of Rs 500,000 or imprisonment for one year or both.

Justice Maqbool Baqir noted that Section 199 is about the abettor. The Section 199 of ITO, 2001 says; "Where a person [knowingly and willfully] aids, abets, assists, incites or incites or induces another person to commit an offence under this Ordinance, the first-mentioned person shall commit an offence punishable on conviction with a fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years."

Munir said even the Prime Minister [Imran Khan] could not personally ask the income tax officer to hand over the tax return of any taxpayer. He contended that any super structure on the illegality must fall, adding the reference is based on illegality.

A 10-judge Full Court, headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial, on Monday heard identical petitions challenging the Presidential Reference against Justice Qazi Faez for allegedly not disclosing his foreign properties in wealth statements. Besides the apex court judge, Pakistan Bar Council, Supreme Court Bar Association, Bar Councils & Association of Punjab, Sindh and Balochistan and Abid Hassan Minto and IA Rehman have also challenged the Presidential Reference.

Munir A Malik said that the President under Article 209 was required to apply his mind, and the subordinate functionaries had to act in accordance with the law. He argued that the President was not required to supplement or add information to the complaint of Waheed Dogar. If the information was incomplete then the President should have asked Dogar to provide more information.

Justice Mansoor remarked that Dogar's complaint has to be placed before the President and if further inquiry was required then it has to be done by Supreme Judicial Council.

The President should have asked Dogar to get more information before forming opinion. The President has to look the information and not to start collecting the information to supplement it. The inquiry should have been conducted by the Supreme Judicial Council.

Munir said Chairman Asset Recovery Unit Shehzad Akbar should not have asked Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) to collect information. Under the Article 209, he is not the competent authority and the only authority is Council to probe the matter.

Justice Muneeb Akhtar asked the counsel, "According to you, the President is to verify the evidence provided with the complaint and if the SJC also has to verify then it means the President and the SJC stand on the same footing."

Munir A Malik claimed that the material had been collected against Justice Qazi even before Waheed Dogar filed the complaint. After collecting the documents, the chairman ARU took it to the law minister.

The collection of material does not fall under the jurisdiction of the law minister, but he may prepare the reference.

Justice Mansoor asked the counsel, "You are saying the President could verify the allegations in the complaint, but he could not supplement it by asking the law minister to collect the material."

Munir A Malik said the federation's stance is that tax returns and properties in the name of his wife and children have not been denied by Justice Qazi Faez, but that he has not declared them in his wealth returns.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2019

Comments

Comments are closed.