Supreme Court Debates Senate’s Role and National Assembly’s Authority in Super Tax Case

Islamabad: The Supreme Court on Monday heard detailed arguments in the high-profile **super tax case**, with discussions focusing on the Senate’s advisory role and the National Assembly’s authority in fiscal legislation.

A five-member constitutional bench, headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan, heard multiple petitions filed by various companies challenging the imposition of the super tax. During the proceedings, the petitioners’ counsel, Abid Shaban, completed his arguments.

Shaban argued that the Senate can only offer recommendations for amendments, while the power to legislate rests with Parliament. He pointed out that the Senate had proposed a 4% tax rate, but the National Assembly approved a 10% rate instead.

Responding to this, **Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail** observed that “the National Assembly has the discretion to accept or reject the Senate’s recommendations.”

Following Shaban’s arguments, **telecom companies’ counsel Nauman Haider** began his submissions, stating that his clients provide internet services and that he would avoid repeating earlier arguments.

Haider referred to a **Fauji Fertilizer case** ruling by the Islamabad High Court, which noted that Pakistan’s industries were under strain. He argued that advance tax is deducted from lawyers’ fees, yet companies are still required to pay the super tax afterward.

Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar inquired whether the super tax was paid from net income, to which Haider responded that all other deductions, including income tax, are made before the super tax is applied. When asked if tax authorities were wrong to collect tax from the fees, Haider replied, “No, the tax officials are not wrong.”

Haider further noted that India initially followed its 1961 tax law but has now adopted a model similar to Pakistan’s, adding that the Indian tax year begins on April 1.

The bench adjourned further proceedings until **Tuesday at 9:30 a.m.**, when Nauman Haider is expected to continue his arguments on behalf of telecom companies.