ISLAMABAD - The Supreme Court on Thursday observed that taxpayers show high income from agriculture land in order to whiten money.
Justice Faisal Arab, a member of the three-judge bench, while addressing Jehangir Tareen’s counsel said: “I am not talking about your client, you (Tareen) might be the highest taxpayer, but people show high agri-income in order to whiten their black money.”
The judge told Tareen’s counsel that “for three years your client was the federal minister. People make money through other means and later on show it in agri-income to white money.” The judge remarked that “in Pakistan, agriculture income is not more than 10 percent”.
The bench headed by Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar heard PML-N leader Hanif Abbasi’s petition against Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf General Secretary Jehangir Tareen for having an offshore company, writing off loan and mis-declaration of assets in the nomination papers for general election 2013.
The bench directed Tareen’s counsel to produce authentic documents of the Punjab revenue department regarding 18,564 acres leased land. Justice Umar Atta Bandial asked the counsel that “you have not shown income from leased land in the nomination papers. The payment made to the landlord (leasor) was not brought on the record”.
Sikandar Bashir, representing the PTI general secretary, earlier argued that his client was an agriculturist and pay the highest income tax. He said that the income shown in income tax return 2010 and 2011 was aggregate agri-income from his own 507 acres land and leased land of 18,564 acres.
In 2010, Tareen in the Punjab revenue department had shown an income Rs120 million and in the same year, he had shown income Rs545 million in the FBR, while in 2011, he had shown the income of Rs160 million in Punjab revenue department and Rs700 million in the FBR.
Sikandar told the bench that the matter regarding the issue was pending before the apex court and the Lahore High Court.
The chief justice said, “they are looking for honesty under section 99(1) of ROPA and Article 62(1)(f) of Constitution”. “We need some authentic record and if you are unable to produce a record from the revenue authorities, then we would see whether we postpone this matter till the verdict on the petition pending before the Supreme Court.” The chief justice said that if the need arises they shall take the assistance of an expert on land issues.
Sikandar argued that the petitioner is seeking disqualification that there is mis-declaration in the statements. He said for that first finding is required under Section 12(1) of ROPA by ECP and if it is established that the act was dishonest then that warrant disqualification under Article 62(1)(f) of Constitution.
The chief justice said in Imran Khan’s case against Nawaz Sharif the scope of Article 184(3) has been elaborated. He asked the counsel what do you think that the bench should do. Sikandar replied that Abbasi’s petition be dismissed. The chief justice said: “If we dismiss his petition and tomorrow a decision comes against you then what would he do?”
Sikandar argued that the petitioner has no cause of action, adding Jehangir’s appeals against the orders of the Punjab land revenue commissioner is still pending. The counsel contended that Abbasi’s case was half-baked. He said the PML-N leader will have a cause of action when the judgment on the pending case was passed.
The chief justice questioned in order to determine dishonesty should any inquiry be held?
Sikandar said the judgment of Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa says that Nawaz Sharif held public-office for 36 years and remained in positions at the apex level, while Tareen was minister only for three years. On the other hand, Nawaz Sharif was controlling all the departments as he was the chief executive of the country.
The chief justice said the case of the petitioner was that Tareen is Member of Parliament. “If you are the holder of public-office and if there is mis-declaration allegations then you will have to explain it as you were the bona fide owner of the land”.
Sikandar contended that the underline allegation in Imran Khan’s petition against ex-PM was that his assets abroad were beyond his pecuniary means, therefore, the Joint Investigation Team was constituted and an inquiry initiated. He, however, said his client is in Pakistan and is the highest taxpayer, which can be shown through banks statements.
Justice Umar Bandial noted that the quantum of taxes paid by Tareen were high and increased. He said “if a person is paying taxes and he is the highest tax-payer, on the basis of assumption, if we give a verdict against then what would be left for him. We should protect the taxpayers.”
He said that the thieves go around free. They don’t file tax returns and get gifts but the genuine person pays taxes and face the music.
The chief justice said it has been alleged that the declared income was disproportion to the sources. He asked what is the authentic proof that the land was acquired on the lease? He said ‘Jamabandi’ will show if it was in your possession or leased.
The chief justice said: “We must not discourage people from paying taxes.” He said they are not sitting to examine tax matters. “We are interested in seeing that what you have declared, there is a discrepancy in it, therefore, you have to explain it.
Anwar Mansoor, counsel for the PTI, was present during the hearing but he suddenly had chest pain. He was taken to a dispensary where the doctor checked him. Later he was shifted to the Rawalpindi Institute of Cardiology.
The case is adjourned till 10 October.