The Federal Constitutional Court of Pakistan has released a detailed written judgment in dozens of tax-related civil appeals, constitutional petitions, and transfer cases, issuing key directions on their disposal and further legal proceedings.
According to the verdict, some cases have been concluded, while several tax references have been remanded to the relevant high courts for decisions in accordance with the law.
The cases were heard by a three-member bench headed by Chief Justice of the Federal Constitutional Court, Justice Ameenuddin Khan, along with Justice Syed Hassan Azhar Rizvi and Justice Arshad Hussain Shah. The hearing took place on January 27, 2026.
The written decision states that senior counsel Makhdoom Ali Khan, representing the taxpayers, completed his arguments, while other lawyers submitted written submissions, which were made part of the official court record. The court also ordered that CPLA No. 724-K/2022 be separated from the remaining matters (de-clubbed) and fixed for independent hearing.
In its ruling, the court referred multiple tax references back to the Peshawar High Court for adjudication. The associated transfer cases were disposed of accordingly.
The cases before the Federal Constitutional Court included civil appeals filed by several major companies and individuals, such as DG Khan Cement, Maple Leaf Cement, Ibrahim Fibres, Habib Rafiq (Private) Limited, Saif Holdings Limited, OPPO Mobile Technologies, Engro Corporation, Atlas Honda, National Investment Trust, Nishat (Chunian) Limited, Daewoo Pakistan Express Bus Service, Kohat Cement, Qarshi Industries, WorldCall Telecom, Colgate-Palmolive, B Energy Limited, and others.
These appeals challenged various judgments of the Lahore High Court, Sindh High Court, and Peshawar High Court, contesting tax measures and notices issued by the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR), the Ministry of Finance, and the federal government.
The court emphasized that all decisions in these matters were made in accordance with the Constitution and the law. A short order in the cases had already been issued on the same day as the hearing.
Separately, the Federal Constitutional Court of Pakistan (FCCP) has adjourned the hearing of an election challenge related to Balochistan Provincial Assembly constituency PB-21 until Thursday, January 29.
The case was heard on Wednesday by a three-member bench headed by Chief Justice of the Federal Constitutional Court of Pakistan, Justice Ameen-ud-Din Khan, and comprising Justice Ali Baqar Najafi and Justice Syed Arshad Hussain Shah.
During the proceedings, Khawaja Harris, counsel for Saleh Bhootani, argued that Form 47 is still available on the Election Commission of Pakistan’s website, according to which Saleh Bhootani secured 30,910 votes and stood first, while Ali Hassan Zehri obtained 17,000 votes.
Khawaja Haris contended that following a recount requested by Ali Hassan Zehri, 13,507 votes cast in favor of Saleh Bhootani were declared invalid, even though the recount request was based only on suspicions. He further stated that law and order deteriorated after polling ended on election day, leading to clashes and road blockages. FIRs were registered over these incidents, but charge sheets have not yet been submitted. He also noted that the Returning Officer had formally informed the Election Commission about the situation.
Chief Justice Ameen-ud-Din Khan inquired about the legal procedure for recounting under the Election Act if the allegations are proven. In response, Khawaja Haris said a recount is permissible and claimed that the recount resulted in an additional 10,577 votes, with total votes rising from 76,000 in the initial count to 87,000 after the recount.
After the completion of arguments by Saleh Bhootani’s counsel, Ali Hassan Zehri’s lawyer, Farooq H. Naek, began his submissions, stating that the case concerns 39 polling stations. He said that the Election Commission had initially ordered re-polling on the recount request, which was challenged by both parties before the Supreme Court.
According to Farooq H. Naek, the Supreme Court subsequently ordered a recount at the request of both parties. He will continue his remaining arguments at the next hearing. The court later adjourned the case until Thursday, January 29.