Skip to content
Bangladesh · Law & legal research
Skip to resource text
Judgmentain.bd library

Government of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Internal Resources Division, Ministry of Finance, Secretariat Building, Ramna, Dhaka and others Vs Radiant Pharmaceuticals Ltd., represented by its Managing Director, Masrur Ahmed, son of Late Mohbub Uddin Ahmed, House No. 22, Road No. 2, Dhanmondi, Dhaka

CIVIL PETITION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL NO.2365 of 2020 · Appellate Division · Court website upload: 2022-09-01.

ReferenceCIVIL PETITION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL NO.2365 of 2020Recorded year2020Court / institutionSupreme Court of Bangladesh — Appellate DivisionEntry added2 Nov 2026
Judgment text
Browse the contents

Case details

Lead case reference on official PDF coverCIVIL PETITION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL NO.2365 of 2020
Caption / parties as listedGovernment of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Internal Resources Division, Ministry of Finance, Secretariat Building, Ramna, Dhaka and others Vs Radiant Pharmaceuticals Ltd., represented by its Managing Director, Masrur Ahmed, son of Late Mohbub Uddin Ahmed, House No. 22, Road No. 2, Dhanmondi, Dhaka
CourtSupreme Court of Bangladesh — Appellate Division
Case reference year2020
Court website upload date2022-09-01
Original index referenceCivil Petition /2020
Additional reference in the official index

(CIVIL PETITION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL NO.2365 of 2020 From the judgment and order dated 10.03.2016 passed by the High Court Division in Writ Petition No.5151 of 2015)

Court index description — excerpt

Constitution of Bangladesh, article 128 and Income Tax Ordinance, 1984 section 120 and 163 (3) Whether audit report has any bearing upon the subjective opinion of assessing officer: The Audit Department has been invested with the authority to inspect the accounts of Revenue Department. The Comptroller and Auditor General is authorized to direct any of his officers to conduct audit of tax receipts or refunds under section 163 (3)(g) of the Income Tax Ordinance. The High Court Division has opined that the CAG has got no jurisdiction to check the merit or demerit of subjective opinions of the assessing officers with regard to allowing or disallowing a particular claim of the concerned assessee. […]

Read the complete description in the official index ↗

The date above is the court website’s upload date. Read the official document for the full decision.

Official Supreme Court index entry ↗

Continue your research

More in this collection

View collection →
Your reading workspace

Contents & tools

Text size100%

Browse the document

Copy this resource reference