Lahore High Court (LHC) was informed on Monday that a hefty amount of RS2 trillion was help with litigation at the Court of Appeal Inland Revenue (ATIR) for the past several years.

The Ministry of Ministry said in its response to a petition against tax law (amendment) that the cases were fixed for various reasons, including arbitrary constitution of benches, inadequate number of benches, delay in fixing cases and disposal of the appeals.

LHC Justice Jawad Hassan took the petition, where certain changes to the appeal procedure delivered under the Income Tax Regulation (ITO) had been contested. The judge called the relevant Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) official on March 25 to explain the changes.

During the case, Justice Hassan noted that it prescribed the procedure for financial jurisdiction in appeals. However, he added, “Through the intended amendment, an appeal forum has been removed.”

According to the judge, a significant number of cases filed in this court were introduced by FBR primarily due to failure to refer to the relevant statutory provisions, the absence of a proper consultation, the issuance of orders in a smooth manner and the failure to use sensible mind.

Because of these deficiencies, this court was often forced to withhold cases back to the commissioners (appeals) for fresh judgment in accordance with the law, Justice Hassan said. “This situation consumes the valuable time before this court, leading to an increase in demand for tax references, thereby affecting the consultation and disposal of other cases,” he added.

The judge mentioned that the FBR did not face any financial barrier in filing tax references because it was exempt from paying any court fees, while a regular lawsuit was obliged to pay RS50,000 per year. Reference.

“This results in a clear discrimination of citizens of Pakistan and deprives them of equal access to justice, which will violate the fundamental rights of the public in accordance with Articles 4, 10-A and 37 (d) of the Constitution,” Justice Hassan noted.

Justice Hassan also noted that the latest changes to ITO placed an extraordinary burden on this court, as there was currently only a division bench for tax references in Bahawalpur, one at Multan, two in Rawalpindi and three at the headquarters in Lahore.

“This court has repeatedly emphasized that the orders adopted by the commissioners (appeals) are often outlined, lacking reasoning and suffering from serious deficiencies, which ultimately results in litigation before this court,” observed Justice Hassan.

However, the defense defended the amendment and said that the intended provisions were deployed to deter unnecessary or junk appeals, which would help streamline the process and reduce the burden