The ongoing legal battle over Pakistan’s super tax took another turn on Friday as the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) deferred further proceedings until January 26. The decision came after lawyers representing the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) wrapped up their arguments before the bench.
A three-member bench, led by Chief Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan, is hearing the case, which revolves around the legality and continued application of certain provisions of the Income Tax Ordinance related to the super tax. The levy has been a contentious issue for major taxpayers, particularly large corporations, who have challenged it in multiple courts across the country.
During the hearing, FBR counsel Hafiz Ahsan Khokhar maintained that the legal foundation of the super tax is already well established. He pointed out that Section 4-B of the Income Tax Ordinance had been upheld by the court back in 2022. According to his argument, the subsequent provision, Section 4-C, remains enforceable and flows naturally from the earlier ruling. This, he suggested, leaves little room for fresh legal challenges to the tax.
Adding to the FBR’s position, counsel Asma Hamid briefed the court on earlier developments in the case. She reminded the bench that the Supreme Court had previously set aside a stay order issued by the Lahore High Court, which had temporarily blocked the collection of the super tax. Following that decision, the apex court directed affected taxpayers to deposit 50 percent of the disputed tax amount with the FBR — a move seen as an attempt to balance revenue needs with pending legal questions.
The bench also raised concerns about the growing number of related petitions, particularly those filed before the Islamabad High Court. Chief Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan sought clarification on whether new litigants were entering the dispute. Responding to this, Asma Hamid explained that most of the petitioners were already part of the ongoing litigation, with only a limited number of new taxpayers joining the challenge.
After hearing the submissions, the court chose to adjourn the matter, setting January 26 as the next date for further proceedings.
The outcome of this case carries significant implications, not just for large taxpayers but also for the government’s revenue strategy. At a time when fiscal pressures are mounting, the super tax remains a key tool for the state — while businesses continue to argue that it places an excessive burden on them. As the next hearing approaches, all eyes will be on the court to see whether it moves toward a final resolution or extends the legal debate even further.