ISLAMABAD - Chief Justice Saqib Nisar, while observing discrepancies in Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf Secretary General Jehangir Tareen’s declaration before the Election Commission of Pakistan, said dishonesty is not a state of mind, but it is reflected through the conduct of a person.
A three-member, bench headed by the chief justice, was hearing Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz leader Hanif Abbasi’s petition seeking disqualification of Tareen for having a offshore company and getting bank loan written off.
At the outset, Justice Nisar told Tareen’s counsel that his stance is that the tax his client paid had been declared in the nomination papers of general election 2013 and there is no difference between the declaration made before the tax authorities and the ECP. “In the nomination papers, Tareen was asked about agriculture income and he thought it was income from owned land, adding till date the agriculture department did not notify that Tareen paid less tax. He had not furnished wrong declaration as he attached the income tax returns with the nomination papers. If there was any intention to conceal the income, it could have been done at that time,” the CJP said.
Sikandar Bashir, representing Tareen, said: “This is my case. This is my defence which the chief justice has encapsulated.” He said Tareen had provided requisite details in the column of entry 14 of nomination papers. “This declaration was in good faith and there was no bad intention or conspiracy,” the counsel said.
Akram Sheikh, the counsel for the PML-N leader, said the bad intention is established from the first day as Tareen has not so far submitted Jamabandi and Khasra Gurdawari of the leased land despite repeated apex court orders. He said Tareen had provided only lease agreements, but not “Jamanbandi and Khasra Gurdawari”.
The chief justice questioned if a person does not have his own land, but cultivates leased land, what he would write in the agriculture income column of entry 14 of the nomination papers.
Sikandar, instead of replying to the query, contended it was not the question of law. He said the reference regarding agriculture income was pending before the Lahore High Court and a civil petition for leave to appeal (CPLA) before the apex court.
“Let the finding in that regard come from them as they have the jurisdiction to decide the matter of agriculture income,” Sikandar said. He argued Tareen could not be disqualified on this issue as he is a regular and serious taxpayer. “Where did my client tell a lie?” he said.
Justice Umar Atta Bandial remarked: “According to your documents, if there is no tax on the leased land, how did this issue come up in the tax audit? You relied upon the Panama Papers judgment and your stance is that in the proceedings under Article 184(3) of the Constitution, the apex court should not look into this matter.” He asked Sikandar whether his client had taken this position before the provincial tax authorities that income from the leased land is not taxable. The counsel said, “Yes, he had taken this position before the tax authorities”. The judge asked Tareen’s counsel on what basis he can say there is no tax on the leased land.
Sikandar said Tareen had declared agriculture income before the Punjab Agriculture Income Tax authorities and the FBR. Justice Faisal Arab said, “You want to say the court can’t issue a notice because the matter is time-barred, according to the Punjab Agri-Income Tax Act, 1997.”
Tareen’s counsel argued these were intricate questions of law. He said, “Dishonesty will be proven if my client has intentionally violated the law. No such condition exists,” he said, adding more material is needed to establish Tareen’s dishonesty.
The chief justice said: “Dishonesty is not the state of mind. It is reflected and proven through conduct.” Sikandar argued whether there was any interpretation of the law that income from owned and leased lands was different. He said there is a nebulous drafting scheme of agriculture income law in the Punjab while there is clarity in the law in Sindh on this issue.
Sikandar concluded arguments on agriculture income tax and would plead on issues of insider trading and the offshore company on October 17.