Finance Act (XXX of 1977)---

----Sched. I, Part III [as amended by Finance (Amendment) Ordinance (II of 1978)]---Surcharge---Retained income---Surcharge cannot be levied on amount of taxes payable and total tax levied can be treated as a "'retained income" for meeting working capital requirement.

Commissioner of Income-tax v. The Asbestos Cement Industries Limited 1993 P T D 343 ref.

Shaik Haider for Applicant.

Mohsin Tayebally for Respondent.

Date of hearing: 10th March, 1993.

JUDGMENT

MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN ADIL KHATRI, J.--The applicant filed an application before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in relation to the assessment year 1978-79 for the assessment of income of the respondent, for reference to this Court of the question whether under the law and the circumstances of the case surcharge could not be levied on amount of taxes payable and whether total tax levied can be treated as a retained income for meeting working capital requirements, but the learned Tribunal dismissed the application on the ground that questions sought to be referred had already been decided against the Department by this Court. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Zone "A" has now filed this application under section 136(2) of the Income Tax Ordinance; 1979.

We have heard Mr. Shaik Haider for the Department and Mr. Mohsin Tayebaly for the respondent.

The above question has been considered and decided in various cases by this Court on the previous references. The matter is now finally settled by the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. The Asbestos Cement Industries Limited 1993 P T D 343 answering the question against the Department.

Under the circumstances following the earlier decisions of this Court and the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court, the above question is I answered in affirmative.

M.BA./C-307/KReference answered.