ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday questioned the discrepancies in the income record of former federal minister for industries and production and incumbent Secretary General of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Jehangir Tareen and sought the complete record pertaining to the owners who leased out over 18,000 acres of land to Mr Tareen.
A three-member bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar and comprising Justice Umar Atta Bandial and Justice Faisal Arab, resumed hearing into the petition filed by PML-N leader Hanif Abbassi, seeking disqualification of PTI General Secretary Jehangir Tareen for non-disclosure of his assets and ownership of offshore companies.
During the hearing, Chief Justice asked the learned counsel of Mr Tareen if his client had not disclosed conflicting figures regarding his agriculture income to tax authorities and Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP).
The Chief Justice said that Mr Tareen showed greater amount of his agriculture income before the Federal Bureau of Revenue (FBR) but disclosed before the Election Commission of Pakistan less amount of agriculture income. Whether this discrepancy was meant for money laundering”, the Chief Justice questioned counsel for Mr Tareen. Sikandar Bashir Mohmand, counsel for Jehangir Tareen however, replied that his client had also filed record pertaining to tax returns with the documents, filing before filing before the Election Commission of Pakistan.
He further submitted that his client had disclosed before the Election Commission of Pakistan income from his personal agriculture land adding that at the same time, apart from personal agriculture land income, his client also showed to the tax authorities, income from the land which he got on lease as well.
This prompted Justice Umer Ata Bandial asking the learned counsel that Mr Tareen had disclosed his agriculture income of Rs1.5 billion besides having over 18,000 acres of land which he got on lease. “We should be provided record pertaining to the payments made to the owners from whom the land was acquired on lease”, Justice Bandial asked the lawyer of Jehangir Tareen.
The Chief Justice however, observed that the court had no concern with the orders of tax officials or scrutiny of tax return but had to see the matter in the context of honesty. The Chief Justice asked for record of the leased land saying, who the owner was and which crop was cultivated on the said leased land. “We must be provided the whole record which must be available in the branches of the revenue department, the Chief Justice asked the learned counsel.
Sikandar Bashir Mohmand while continuing his arguments before the court submitted the tax authorities while finding some discrepancies in the agriculture income of Jehangir Tareen had issued show cause notice to his client. He said that the tax authorities, while examining the record, accepted the explanation given by his client relating to agriculture income during the year 2010.
Similarly he said that on the matter pertaining to 2011 agriculture income of his client, the tax authorities gave verdict against his client adding that at present, both the cases were pending at the Supreme Court and High Court. The learned counsel contended that unless and until any declaration came from the court against his client, nobody could seek his client’s disqualification. At this, Justice Umer Ata Bandial observed that the court might initiate proceedings under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution for giving misstatements.
The counsel for Mr Tareen claimed that the case of his client was quite different from that of Panama Papers case, as the case of ousted premier Nawaz Sharif pertained to concealing of facts, besides he had been holding the public office for last 36 year, whereas his client became a public office holder during the last three years.
Chief Justice asked the learned counsel if any misstatement was found in the nomination papers of Mr Tareen and then what should be done, Sikandar Bashir replied that the court could order an inquiry into it. The Chief Justice recalled that in Panama Papers case too, the court had ordered investigation and formed the Joint Investigation Team (JIT).
The learned counsel claimed that his client had been paying taxes regularly, and he was one of the biggest taxpayers of Pakistan, adding that he even had paid provincial tax on his agriculture income. Justice Umer Ata Bandial observed that those paying taxes should be encouraged by providing relief and ignoring their minor mistakes, however the allegation against Tareen was of "whitening the black money".
Justice Faisal Arab observed that he would not mention the name of Mr Tareen but usually people tend to disclose larger agriculture income for whitening the black money, adding that as Mr Tareen had also declared his agriculture income greater that led to suspicion and doubts. The court adjourned the hearing till next Tuesday.
