FBR concludes super tax case arguments in Supreme Court

FBR concludes super tax case arguments in Supreme Court

Islamabad – The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Monday adjourned proceedings in the high-profile super tax case until May 22, after the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) concluded its arguments.

The constitutional bench, comprising five justices, is examining the legality and scope of the super tax under Section 4B of the Income Tax Ordinance.

The Supreme Court bench is headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan and includes Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, and Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan. The case has garnered significant attention due to its potential implications on tax policy and the powers of the FBR to impose additional levies.

During Monday’s proceedings, the FBR’s legal team finalized their presentation, focusing on the interpretation of Section 4B and the authority it grants the government to impose a super tax. Justice Aminuddin Khan, presiding over the hearing, inquired whether senior counsel Makhdoom Ali Khan intended to respond specifically to Section 4B. In reply, Makhdoom requested access to the written submissions made by Dr. Shahnawaz and other lawyers representing the FBR, stating he would study them before delivering his rebuttal in the next session.

Additional Attorney General Aamir Rehman also addressed the Supreme Court, informing the bench that he would be submitting three precedent-setting court rulings relevant to the matter. He emphasized that these rulings clearly support the government’s authority to introduce taxes for targeted purposes. The Supreme Court directed Rehman to present the rulings in written form for consideration.

The bench then adjourned the hearing, allowing Makhdoom Ali Khan to begin his rebuttal on May 22.

This case is pivotal for the FBR, as it will determine whether the super tax mechanism can continue under existing legislation. A ruling in favor of the FBR would reinforce its ability to generate revenue through specialized tax instruments, while a contrary verdict could reshape future tax strategies and fiscal planning.