kco newsletter may 2020 - khilji.net.pk · .+,/-, $1' &2 1(:6/(77(5 &kduwhuhg...

KHILJI AND CO NEWSLETTER Chartered Accountants

MAY - 2020

IN THE NAME OF ALLAH ALMIGHTY, THE MOST MERCIFUL, MOST BENEFICENT

NEWSLETTER

MAY 2020

Plot 2, Mezzanine Floor, Khumrial Plaza, I&T Center Street 22, Sector G-8/4, Islamabad. Tel: +92 51 2253303-6, Fax +92 51 2253307, Email: [email protected], Website:www.khilji.net.pk


MAY - 2020

DISCLAIMER

CONTENTS COMMENTARY ON SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN CIVIL PETITION NO.

3224 of 2019

COMMENTARY ON LAHORE HIGH COURT WRIT PETITION NO. 39800 of 2109

COMMENTARY ON SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN CIVIL PETITION NO.

1127 OF 2011

COMMENTARY ON THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI SUIT NO. 42 OF

2020

NOTIFICATIONS / CIRCULARS

BLOG OF THE MONTH

SOCIAL MEDIA PRESENCE

Khilji & Co (Chartered Accountants) is pleased to present Firm’s Newsletter. The only purpose of this document is to provide updated information to our clients about recent circulars/ notifications issued by various authorities during this month and also to provide our clients with information on latest useful decisions of appellate courts. The information provided in this document should only be used in conjunction with professional opinion from tax/ legal advisor and checked for updated position of law. This document as a whole or its any part should not be reproduced in any form without prior written approval from Khilji & Co. This newsletter is distributed free of cost to our clients only. We humbly request our readers to please provide us the most valuable comments to make this more informative and useful. It has always been a pleasure to be of service to our clients. EDITORIAL GROUP:

1. Mr. Muhammad Waheed Iqbal, FCA Chief Editor 2. Mr. Muhammad Shafaat Ali Principal Editor 3. Syed Asim Habib Section Editor



MAY - 2020


COVID-19 PREVENTIVE MEASURES

It is matter of our fundamental faith that Almighty Allah is the most merciful and beneficent and the foremost thing to do at all times

particularly difficult times like these is to seek forgiveness from Allah for all our intentional and unintentional mistakes.

Let us pray and seek forgiveness from Allah for all sins and wrongdoings

committed by us deliberately or otherwise. May Allah keep all humanity including us and our families safe from this and all kinds of diseases.

AMEEN

While the spiritual prevention of all diseases including this CORONA should be sought through Namaz and Istaghfar however at the same time

we have been taught through Quran and Sunnah to take all necessary measures and medicines against all such diseases while keeping faith that

the power to cure remains with Allah.


MAY - 2020

1.

SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN CIVIL PETITION NO. 3224 of 2019 PETITIONER: MESSRS PAK GULF CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (PVT.) LTD. RESPONDENT: FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN THROUGH SECRETARY DATE OF HEARING/ORDER: October 29, 2019 Brief Facts of The Case: The petitioner is engaged in the business of construction of buildings consisting of various units and thereafter sells these units/flats/apartments through sale agreements. The petitioner received a notice from the tax authorities to pay capital Value Tax on Sale/Transfer of properties/flats/apartments Being aggrieved the taxpayer filed petition in Islamabad High Court by taking stance that the respondent had no jurisdiction to declare the petitioner as a collecting authority being attesting and transferring authority and was not under any legal obligation to collect and pay any CVT. A declaration was also sought that the notice issued by Respondent No.3 was without lawful authority. The said petition was dismissed by the Islamabad High Court vide order/writ petition No. 271 of 2018 dated 03.06.2019 and the petitioner filed the appeal against the said order. Findings By The Court:

As per section 7(4) of the Finance Act 1989 CVT is required to be collected by the person responsible for registering or attesting the transfer of the asset in respect of which the tax is payable by the purchaser at the time of registering or attesting the transfer, the authority to collect CVT vests with the registration authority namely, the Registrar of Documents.

During recent years with the development of co-operative housing societies and statutory authorities engaged in the business of development and sale of real estate, a methodology of transferring immovable property has evolved, whereby properties are transferred privately, such transfers including issuance of transfer letters, allotment letters, agreements to sell and other similar documents which do not require registration. Although such mode of transfer is not a legally recognized mode of transfer of immovable property. This method has obvious financial benefits by way of saving Stamp Duty, Registration Fee and CVT.

Circular No. 7 of 1991 dated 23rd of May, 1991 was issued in which co-operative societies are responsible for collection of CVT at the time of transfer of properties amongst their members which was essentially an internal/in-house transaction not necessarily requiring registration with any authority or payment of Stamp Duty, Registration Fee or CVT, except for a transfer fee payable to the society or authority.

The methodology adopted by the petitioner is, in all material terms the same as co-operative societies which have been obligated to collect CVT at the time of transfer. Consequently, if the petitioner has failed to collect CVT from the person/entity liable to pay the same being the registering agency and or attesting authority it is obligated to pay the same to the Federal Government.



MAY - 2020

Decision After considering the facts, legal provisions, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition in the following words: Quote “ 11. For the reasons enumerated above, we are in no manner of doubt that the sale, purchase, transfer and other similar transactions are undertaken between the petitioner-company which is the owner of the immovable assets and buyer in whose favour the transfer takes place, therefore, it is only logical that the petitioner should be obligated to collect CVT from the purchaser and deposit it with the Federal Government. Even otherwise, the petitioner squarely falls within the purview of sections 7(d) and (4) of the Act read with Rule 4 of Rules, 1990 cannot deny its liability by relying upon hyper technicalities and stratagems. 12. The learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to demonstrate any legal, procedural or jurisdictional error, defect or flaw in the impugned judgment that may furnish basis for grant of leave. 13. For reasons recorded above, we do not find any merit in this petition. It is accordingly dismissed. Leave to appeal is refused.” Un-quote LAHORE HIGH COURT WRIT PETITION NO. 39800 of 2109 PETITIONER: AITEX PAKISTAN RESPONDENT: GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN AND OTHERS DATE OF HEARING/ORDER: August 29, 2019 Brief Facts of The Case That the Petitioner is a liaison office of M/s. Associacion De Investigacion De La IndustriaTextil (the "Spanish Association"), is a private technology centre dedicated to applied research and technological innovation, and performs the quality control tests and certifications which also help the Pakistani textile companies to improve their international business. The Petitioner has filed the Writ Petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 by taking stance that the petitioner was granted permission/ license by BOI, further the Petitioner applied for renewal of permission on 19.02.2018, the Respondent No.2/BOI replied that since the Petitioner is a "non-profitable organization (NGO)", therefore the Petitioner should contact the Respondent No.1 /Secretary Interior, MOI (Chairman INGO). The Petitioner argued in all its submissions to BOI and MOI that it does not fall under the definition of INGO, and it is merely a NPO. Therefore, the Notification providing the Policy for Regulation of INGOs in Pakistan does not apply to it. . The concerned Respondents have repeatedly stated their position that the Petitioner is an INGO and is regulated by MOI through the Notification, and there is a mechanism available for its registration through an online portal made specifically for this purpose.



MAY - 2020

Questions Proposed By The Court:

1) Whether the Spanish Association, being an NPO comes within the ambit of an INGO? 2) Whether being an NPO, Spanish Association is required to be registered as per the Notification? 3) Whether earlier renewal of license by Respondent No.1 (BOI) provides a fresh ground to the petitioner for

further renewal? 4) Whether the Spanish Association is required to follow the procedure provided under the Notification for its

registration or renewal of permission for establishment of a liaison office in Pakistan?

The Court stated that no has been brought on record which provides clear distinction between an NGO and NPO. Taking help from legal dictionary the Court discussed in detail meaning of NPO and NGO and concluded that definition of term NGO clearly transpires that words "A non-profit making organization" is used to define an NGO. Generally, NPO is an organization that operates on the principle that no member will receive profits from such organization, and such organization applies its surplus funds on the promotion of its objectives rather than distributing it among the members of such organization. On the other hand, NGO is an association of persons that works for promoting humanitarian objective instead of a commercial one, and is formed by ordinary citizens that operates autonomously/independently of government. NGO and NPO are two of the most common designations which work towards improving human welfare and betterment of the society, and are often interchangeable. Further, the Court discussed the notification of MOI which provides the Policy for Regulation of INGOs in Pakistan and has concluded that the Notification applies to such entities which meet the following criteria:

(1) INGOs, or INPOs which (i) may not be registered in their home countries as INGOs, (ii) are part of the not- profit sector, and (iii) undertake activities similar to typical INGOs;

(2) receiving foreign contributions or utilizing foreign economic assistance to engage in various development programs in Pakistan;

(3) private and self-governing entities which are separate and not controlled by the Government; (4) entities which are not receiving return profits generated to their owners or directors or staff (5) registered organization with defined aims and objectives.

Since the Petitioner has itself claimed it to be a non-profit organization, it means that applicability of above clauses (1)(ii) and (2) to (5) is not disputed and nothing has been brought on record establishing that the Spanish Association is controlled by its Government, therefore, for all intents and purposes, it can be stated that the Spanish Association is operating as an autonomous body independent of the Government, and can also be categorized as an INGO. Therefore, the Notification is applicable to the Petitioner.

Further, it was held that as far as earlier renewal of grant of permission/license to the petitioner by the Respondent No.2/BOI, is concerned, it is settled law that an illegality cannot be perpetuated while exercising powers under Article 199 of the Constitution. Decision After considering the facts, legal provisions and applicable Laws, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition in the following words Quote “36. In view of the above mentioned circumstances and the applicable laws, the instant Petition is hereby dismissed being devoid of merits and the Petitioner is directed to follow the online application procedure under the Notification for its registration, which shall be decided by the MOI and the relevant departments strictly within the stipulated period of sixty (60) days under the applicable laws. The Petitioner shall make this application, if so advises, within two (02) months of passing of this judgment.



MAY - 2020

37. Meanwhile, in view of the prior functioning of the Petitioner in Pakistan, the Respondents shall not obstruct in the lawful business of the Petitioner till the decision on the application of the Petitioner under the above para. 38. Further, SECP is also directed to formulate appropriate Regulations, after following the applicable laws including the Notification, which are applicable specifically to INGOs or INPOs as it will create discrimination to foreign entities to do business in Pakistan in order to attract and facilitate foreign investment in Pakistan for the future of its economy.” Un-quote SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN CIVIL PETITION NO.1127 OF 2011 PETITIONER COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (LEGAL) RTO PESHAWAR RESPONDENT: SAFEER JAN DATE OF HEARING/ORDER: MAY 11, 2019 BRIEF FACTS: The COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (LEGAL) REGIONAL TAX OFFICER, PESHAWAR has filled appeal against the judgment T.R.No 85 of 2007 dated May 26, 2007 passed by the Peshawar High Court. The respondent is an individual deriving income from salary and agriculture and filed ITR for the tax year 2002 & 2003 respectively. The declared income was not supported by documentary prof and source of income and investment had swelled up exponentially. The department came to the conclusion that the respondent had concealed his income and issue notice under section 61 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 (since repealed) [hereinafter to be referred as "the Ordinance"] along with detailed memo. The respondent contested the notice and produced wealth reconciliation statement, record of land revenue, accounts of Messrs. Khalil Enterprises (a partnership Firm) and gift deeds However, the taxation officer did not accept the contention of the respondent regarding withdrawal of share from the firm and added the same under section 13(1) (aa) of the ordinance. Similarly, the amounts of gifts received from various family members was also added under section 12(18) of the ordinance. OBSERVATION OF THE COURT The learned court has observed the following issues: i) As far as the addition of share from AOP of Rs. 2.9 million is concerned, the respondent had fully explained the amount in question as his share out of the income of the firm (MESSRS KHALIL ENTERPRISES) that accumulated over the years and the said amount was fully tax paid. ii) As for as the amount gifted is concerned to the respondent by other shareholders of the firm through gift deeds executed between the partners is concerned, the members of AOP had only authorized the respondent to withdraw a certain amount from their share in the AOP. As such no cash had been paid or received, we are in no manner of doubt that the provisions of section 12(18) of the ordinance were not attracted in this case.



MAY - 2020


DECISION: After considering the facts, legal provisions and applicable Laws, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition in the following words Quote: “9. This being the position, we are in no manner of doubt that the provisions of section 12(18) of the Ordinance were not attracted in this case and the Commissioner of Income Tax as well as the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and the learned High Court were correct in recording findings to that effect. Learned counsel for the Appellant has not been able to persuade us to take a different view from the one taken by the lower fora. 10. For the afore-noted reasons, we do not find any merit in this appeal. The same is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.” Un-quote THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI SUIT NO. 42 OF 2020 PETITIONER: SYED ZAIN UL ABIDEEN (PLAINTIFF) RESPONDENT: FEDERAL BOARD OF REVENUE & OTHERS (DEFENDANTS) DATE OF HEARING: FEBRUARY 21, 2019 DATE OF ORDER: APRIL 16, 2019 ISSUES INVOLVED: The plaintiff has challenged the attachment of his bank accounts under the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 2017. BRIEF FACTS: The Plaintiff received a summon in relation to an inquiry of a benami transaction and to appear before the officer to answer certain questions in respect of certain property held by him. Thereafter plaintiff did not receive any further notice of inquiry, but his bank accounts have been attached by DCIR (by issuing impugned attachment letters) acting as initiating officer under the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 2017.

The plaintiff approached this court by taking stance that the impugned attachment letters as void ab inito, and for a permanent injunction to restrain action on the basis thereof and also prays for suspension of impugned attachment letters. OBSERVATION OF THE COURT: The learned court has observed the following issues: The plaintiff submitted firstly that, the power to provisionally attach a property is provided by Section 22(3) whereas the impugned attachment letters have been issued under Section 22(4)(a)(i) of the Act. Such an error hardly constitutes an act without jurisdiction and is in any case protected by section 59 of the Act.


MAY - 2020

Another ground taken for attacking the exercise of jurisdiction by Initiating officer as that the impugned attachment was made without the requisite show-cause notice under Section 22(1) of the Act. However, learned counsel for Initiating Officer placed on record the show-cause notice issued under Section 22(1) of the Act and also filed a copy of courier receipt to show that the show-cause notice was duly sent to the plaintiff and he repeatedly sought adjournments in inquiry against him after that the initiating Officer issued a final notice and under section 16 of the ACT and also issued notice under section 22, 22(5) and 24 of the ACT. The plaintiff contended that the said show-cause notice appear to have been made afterwards and back-dated, and also disputed the courier receipt as well which does not inspire any confidence. Afterward it is an allegation of malafides-in-fact on the Initiating Officer as distinct from malafides-in-law. It is settled law that before the allegation of malafides can be allowed to be proved, a presumption of correctness attaches to official acts. DECISION: Quote “17. The upshot of the above discussion is that the plaint does not raise any ground that constitutes an exception to interfere in the exercise of jurisdiction by the special fora prescribed under the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 2017. Consequently, the implied bar to the jurisdiction of this Court that arises by reason of the existence of special fora to determine matters arising under the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 2017, remains intact. Therefore, the plaint is rejected under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC and CMA No. 290/2020 stands dismissed accordingly.” Un-quote



MAY - 2020


NOTIFICATION / CIRCULARS FBR NOTIFICATION ISSUING AUTHORITY: FEDERAL BOARD OF REVENUE POWERS EXERCISED U/S: 50 of STA, 1990 NOTIFICATION NO: SRO. 353(1)/2020 DATE OF ISSUANCE: MAY 05, 2020 EFFECTIVE FROM: WITH IMMEDIATE EFFECT (i.e. MAY 05, 2020) AMENDMENTS MADE IN: SALES TAX RULES 2006 LINK OF DOCUMENT https://khilji.net.pk/wp-

content/uploads/2020/05/2020561353338781SRO353.pdf COMMENTARY Rule 111A Through this notification a new Rule 111A has been inserted whereby the various

properties has been exempted for the purpose of recovery of tax from defaulters and FBR also restricted the tax officials not to attach the certain assets for recovery of tax from defaulters.

The following properties/assets has been exempted for attachment for the purpose of recovery of tax:

a) the necessary wearing apparel, cooking vessels, beds and bedding of the

defaulters, his wife and children, and such personal ornaments, as, in accordance with religious usage, cannot be parted with by any women.

b) tools of artisans, and where the defaulter is an agriculturist, his implements of husbandry and such cattle and seed grain as may be necessary to enable him to earn his livelihood as such.

c) houses and other buildings (with the materials and the sites and the land immediately appurtenant thereto and necessary for their enjoyment) belonging to an agriculturist and occupied him.

d) books of account. e) a mere right to sue for damages. f) any right of personal service g) stipends and gratuities allowed to a pensioner of the Government, or

payable out of any service family pension fund notified in official Gazette by the Federal Government or the Provincial Government in this behalf, and political pensions;

h) all compulsory deposits and other sums in or derived from fund to which the Provident Funds Act, 1925 (XIX of 1925), for the time being applies in so far as they are declared by the Act not to be liable to attachment;

i) any allowance forming part of the emoluments of any servant of Government or of any servant of a railway or local authority which the appropriate Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, declare to be exempt from attachment, and any subsistence grant or allowance made to any such servant while under suspension



MAY - 2020

j) any expectancy of succession by survivorship or other merely contingent or possible right or interest and a

k) right to future maintenance Rule 150ZB(4) A new sub rule (4) is inserted, whereby it is made mandatory for all restaurants,

bakeries, caterers and sweetmeat shops supplying prepared food, food stuff and sweetmeat to show the value of tax separately along with retail price on their menu card or display menu board in the outlets for the end consumer.

Rule 150ZEA (4) A new sub rule (4) is inserted, whereby it is made mandatory for all retailors to

show prices and amount of tax separately on the price tags attached with finished fabric and locally manufactured finished articles of textiles and textile made ups and leather and artificial leather.

FBR NOTIFICATION ISSUING AUTHORITY: FEDERAL BOARD OF REVENUE POWERS EXERCISED U/S: 7 (4) of STA, 1990 NOTIFICATION NO: SRO. 352(1)/2020 DATE OF ISSUANCE: MAY 05, 2020 EFFECTIVE FROM: WITH IMMEDIATE EFFECT (i.e. MAY 05, 2020) AMENDMENTS MADE IN: ALES TAX ACT, 1990 LINK OF DOCUMENT https://khilji.net.pk/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/2020561353859501SRO352.pdf COMMENTARY Adjustment/Transfer of Common Input Tax Through this notification the Federal Government has allowed the registered

Petroleum Exploration and Production Company serving as Operator in a joint venture to transfer share of common input tax to other registered persons/Working Interest Owners (WIOS) in the joint venture proportionate to their respective working interest. Other WIOs will adjust input tax so transferred by the operator against their respective output sales tax liability.

The Operator may transfer the relevant share in common input tax to other registered persons in the joint venture by issuing “CREDIT TRANSFER NOTE” showing the amount of sales tax involved with zero sales value.

And common input tax of the operator shall be reduced by the same amount as mentioned in such note issued by him



MAY - 2020

SECP - GUIDANCE ON RISK BASED APPROACH TO AML/CFT DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC Due to the recent outbreak of COVID-19, the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) issued interim measures for carrying out Customer Due Diligence (CDD) risk-based approach guidelines may be used as laid out in the document. These are self-explanatory and largely related to Section 42 companies and NBFCs. https://khilji.net.pk/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/AML-CFT-Guidance-on-RBA-in-Covid-19-pandemic.pdf KHILJI & CO COMMENTARY ON COMPANIES (AMENDMENT) ORDINANCE, 2020 The President of Pakistan has approved amendments to Companies Act, 2017 through Companies (Amendment) Ordinance, 2020. These amendments are proposed by Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) to promote ease of doing business, improve protection of minority shareholders and remove some anomalies noted in the provisions of the Act Khilji and Co is pleased to prepare and publish a detailed Commentary on this Ordinance Please click on link below to read the Khilji & Co Commentary: https://khilji.net.pk/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/COMPANIES-AMENDMENT-ORDINANCE-2020.pdf SECP NOTIFICATION (RELIEF TO COMPANIES ENTITIES IAS 39) The Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) issued Notification ref: S.R.O. 414 (I)/2020. dated May 11,2020 Through this self-explanatory notification, the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan have allowed relief by modifying certain requirements contained in IAS 39 in relation to Available for Sale (AFS) Equity Investments for companies that are applying IAS 39/principles of IAS 39 (for Available for Sale equity instruments). The requirements of the notification are optional and companies can decide to follow the full requirements of IAS 39. https://www.secp.gov.pk/document/sro-414-i-2020-relief-to-companies-entities-ias-39/?wpdmdl=39269 SECP CIRCULAR Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan issued Circular 19 on May 15, 2020. Through this Self Explanatory Circular, SECP issued facilitative guidelines regarding renewal of licences under section 42 of Company Law. Please click below to read the original Circular. https://khilji.net.pk/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Extension-in-Time-for-Renewal-of-Licenses-due-to-COVID-19.pdf



MAY - 2020

FBR INFORMATION

INTRODUCTION Federal Board of Revenue has issued extension in the dates of Payment Submission of Sales Tax and Federal Excise Returns for the Tax Period MARCH 2020. ISSUING AUTHORITY: FEDERAL BOARD OF REVENUE POWERS EXERCISED U/S: SECTION 74 OF SALES TAX ACT 1990 SECTION 43 OF FEDERAL EXCISE ACT 2005. NOTIFICATION NO: C.NO. 9 (11) ST-LPE/MISC/2016 TAX PERIOD MARCH 2020 DATE OF ISSUANCE: MAY 15, 2020 COMMENTARY Payment Date

1. The date of payment has been extended till May 27, 2020 Submission Date

2. The date of submission has been extended till May 30, 2020. LINK OF DOCUMENT https://khilji.net.pk/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/202051517515174102020-05-15STRMarch.pdf

INTRODUCTION Federal Board of Revenue has issued extension in the dates of Payment Submission of Sales Tax and Federal Excise Returns for the Tax Period APRIL 2020. ISSUING AUTHORITY: FEDERAL BOARD OF REVENUE POWERS EXERCISED U/S: SECTION 74 OF SALES TAX ACT 1990 SECTION 43 OF FEDERAL EXCISE ACT 2005. NOTIFICATION NO: C.NO. 9 (11) ST-LPE/MISC/2016 TAX PERIOD APRIL 2020 DATE OF ISSUANCE: MAY 19, 2020 COMMENTARY Payment Date

1. The date of payment has been extended from May 15, 2020 to May 29, 2020 Submission Date

2. The date of submission has been extended from May 18, 2020 to May 30, 2020. LINK OF DOCUMENT http://download1.fbr.gov.pk/Docs/202051913514191772020-05-19(ExtensionSTR).pdf



MAY - 2020


BLOG OF THE MONTH This blog is written by Mr. Abdul Hafeez, Senior Manager Taxation Advisory Services. Please read this blog and provide your valued comments.

PAYMENT OF CAPITAL VALUE TAX (CVT) Civil Petition No. 3224 of 2019 Capital value tax (CVT) has been imposed through section 7 of the Finance Act, 1989 which places the responsibility of collecting CVT on the registering or attesting authority at the time of registering or attesting the transfer. Ordinarily, the title of immovable property is transferred through a registered document which is required to be registered with the Registrar of documents in terms of provisions of the Registration Act, 1908. In this case the authority to collect CVT vests with the registration authority i.e. the Registrar of Documents. The Supreme Court through subject mentioned decision has discussed the liability to collect and pay CVT in the situation where properties are transferred privately without involving the registrar of documents. Such modes of transfers include issuance of transfer letters, allotment letters, agreements to sell and other similar documents which do not require registration. The Supreme Court held that where sale of properties is made through agreement to sell and issuance of other related documents without involving the registrar of documents, it is obligation of the agency registering or attesting the transfer to collect the CVT and pay the same to the Federal Government. Quote: “For the reasons enumerated above, we are in no manner of doubt that the sale, purchase, transfer and other similar transactions are undertaken between the petitioner-company which is the owner of the immovable assets and buyer in whose favour the transfer takes place, therefore, it is only logical that the petitioner should be obligated to collect CVT from the purchaser and deposit it with the Federal Government. Even otherwise, the petitioner squarely falls within the purview of sections 7(d) and (4) of the Act read with Rule 4 of Rules, 1990 cannot deny its liability by relying upon hyper technicalities and stratagems.” Unquote [Emphasis supplied] Copy of the judgment is attached herewith for your ease of reference. https://khilji.net.pk/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Supreme-Court-Judgment-Civil-Petition-No.-3224-of-2019.pdf


MAY - 2020

UPCOMING PUBLICATION

SOCIAL MEDIA PRESENCE We at Khilji & Co, Chartered Accountants are fully aware of the fact that in this modern day and age connectivity is the key. Hence, we keep of striving for this through various social media forums. Please visits our pages and do provide your valuable comments. FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/khiljiandco/

LINKEDIN: https://www.linkedin.com/in/khilji-and-co-chartered-accountants-982b73143/

TWITTER: https://twitter.com/AndKhilji

WHATSAPP: https://chat.whatsapp.com/BHCSFRh1rfuIBSwtIWJWFp

YOUTUBE: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCA4UjhDS_AMKNOFVu7_Qjyg


KHILJI & CO COMMENTARY ON FINANCE BILL 2020