Supreme Court Thursday sought details from Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) General Secretary Jehangir Khan Tareen pertaining to over 18,000 acres of agriculture land, which he acquired on lease, to ascertain reason behind discrepancy in his income records.
A three-member bench led by Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar observed this while resuming the hearing of Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz leader Hanif Abbasi seeking disqualification of the PTI chairman Imran Khan and general secretary Jehangir Khan Tareen.
During the course of proceedings, pointing out discrepancy in agriculture income of Tareen, Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar observed that the respondent declared different amounts of income before Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) and Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), saying it may be an effort to whitening the black money.
Advancing arguments before the bench, the counsel for Tareen, Sikandar Bashir, said that his client declared assets before the Election Commission along with the record of income tax returns.
Sikandar Bashir reiterated that Tareen didn't conceal anything in tax returns, adding that being the highest taxpayer his client had declared income of his own holdings and income from a chunk of land he acquired on lease.
Justice Umar Atta Bandial observed that Tareen had declared an income of Rs 1.5 billion from his holdings whereas he had disclosed to have over 18,000 acres of land on lease.
Justice Bandial asked the counsel for Tareen to provide record of payment which his client paid to the owners of the leased agriculture land as annual rent.
Sikandar Bashir submitted that his client is ready to satisfy the court over payments to the owners of the leased land by providing all record; to which Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar asked Tareen's lawyer to provide land revenue record pertaining to Jamabandi, Khasra Gardawari and proof of ownership of the land which was given on lease to Tareen.
Sikandar Bashir argued that the FBR had issued notice to his client over purported discrepancy in the amount of income and later accepted Tareen's explanation as tax authorities declared his client's agriculture income of the year 2010 accurate; however, the income tax appellant authority dismissed the findings of subordinate forum to which Tareen invoked the Lahore High Court's jurisdiction for remedy.
The counsel for Tareen apprised the court that again in the fiscal year 2011, the tax authorities issued a notice to his client which had been challenged before the Lahore High Court, saying Tareen's cases against tax authorities are under adjudication before the high court and Supreme Court.
Sikandar Bashir was of the view that till final decisions of such cases no application has ground to seek disqualification of his client in the current matter.
Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar observed that under the Article 184(3) of the Constitution, the apex court has jurisdiction to ask for inquiry over misdeclaration of assets before the Election Commission as it had asked for an inquiry in the Panama Papers case.
Sikandar Bashir said that the Panama Papers case was about Nawaz Sharif whose reign spread over 36 years whereas his client held public office just for three years, adding that Tareen is the only person who paid a substantial amount of agriculture tax in the country.
Asking Sikandar Bashir to produce all the land revenue record about the land which was acquired on lease for agriculture purposes, Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar questioned if record about the land doesn't match with his client's claim then what stance of the respondent would be?
Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar observed that court doesn't mean to discourage taxpayers of the country, saying the difference between tax returns and declaration before the Election Commission is an admitted fact.