High Court Division · Special Original Jurisdiction
Anlima Yarn Dying Limited v Government of Bangladesh and others
Writ Petition 1789/2014 · Rule discharged · Decided 15 September 2026
The petitioner company challenged, under article 102 of the Constitution, section 16CCC of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1984, inserted by section 15 of the Finance Act, 2011, which imposed a minimum tax of 0.50% of gross receipts in an assessment year. It contended that the provision was enacted without lawful authority and was contrary to its fundamental rights under articles 27, 31, 40 and 42 of the Constitution. A Rule Nisi was issued on 18.03.2014. At the hearing the Deputy Attorney General informed the Court that the identical matter had been settled by a Special Bench of the High Court Division, which discharged the Rule by majority on 24.08.2016 in TK Paper Products Limited v Bangladesh (70 DLR 683), and that the Appellate Division had affirmed that judgment on 14.12.2022 in S. Alam Bag Manufacturing Mills Ltd. v Government of Bangladesh (14 LM (AD) (2023) 344). In view of the Appellate Division's judgment, the Court found no merit in the Rule, discharged it and recalled the interim injunction.
- Whether section 16CCC of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1984, inserted by section 15 of the Finance Act, 2011 and imposing a minimum tax of 0.50% of gross receipts, was enacted without lawful authority as contrary to articles 27, 31, 40 and 42 of the Constitution.
- The challenge to section 16CCC of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1984 was identical to the matter settled by a Special Bench in TK Paper Products Limited v Bangladesh, 70 DLR 683, which the Appellate Division affirmed.
- In view of the Appellate Division's judgment in S. Alam Bag Manufacturing Mills Ltd. v Government of Bangladesh, 14 LM (AD) (2023) 344, the Rule had no merit.
- The interim order of injunction granted when the Rule was issued was recalled, with no order as to costs.
Considering the facts and circumstance, and in view of the judgment of the Apex Court, we are of the view that there is no merit in the Rule.
