ORDER ALI AKBAR QURESHI, J- This order shall dispose of this writ petition as well as the connected Writ Petitions Nos. 6605/2008, 6731/2008 and 6732/2008 as identical question of law and facts are involved.
2. Through this Constitutional petition, the petitioner has questioned the validity of a Notices Nos.
AUDIT-020LTU/4520, dated 27.5.2008 and No. AUDIT-02- LTU/4521, dated 27.5.2008 under Sections 11(1 )(b) and 122(5) issued for the Tax year 2007 (in , W.P. No. 6845/2008); (2) Notice No. AUDIT-02- LTU/3821 etc. Dated 11.4.2008, 18.4.2008 and 27.5.2008 for the Tax year 2003 (in W.P, No. 6605/2008);
(3) Notice No. AUDIT-02-LTU/3837 etc. Dated'rt4.4.2008, 18.4.2008 and 27.5.2008 for the Tax year 2006 (in W.P. No. 6732/2008) and Notice No. AUDIT-2- LTU/3824 etc. Dated 11.4.2008,18.4.2008 and 27.5.2008 for the Tax year 2004 (in W.P. No. 6731/2008) respectively and has prayed for their cancellation, In response of the notice issued by this Court, the learned Legal Advisor (Revenue) appeared in the Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contended that the respondent- Department has issued the aforesaid notices for the reassessment of the Return filed by the petitioner but without observing the provisions of Section 122(5) read with 122(1) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001. In presence of both the learned counsel for the parties, it was agreed that the respondent-Department shall issue the required notice and will also provide fair opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the revenue undertook to issue the notice under the relevant provisions of the Ordinance ibid and the case was adjourned for 24.6.2008. On the said date, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted an application under Order 17, Rule 6, CPC for amendment of the writ petition. The learned counsel for the respondent also appeared and placed on record the copy of the notice issued to the petitioner u/S. 122(5) read with Section 122(1) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 and further submitted that the petitioner instead of appearing before the concerned authority, has filed this application for amendment of the writ petition. The grievance voiced by the petitioner, through the instant Constitutional petition has been redressed by the respondent-Department and any controversy, if involved in the case is to be decided by the authority concerned. The case, as informed by the learned counsel for the revenue, is fixed for 27.6.2008 so the petitioner shall appear before the concerned authority to prosecute his case, It is reiterated that the concerned authority shall afford fair and reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
3. In these circumstances, the grievance of the petitioner is redressed and nothing is left to these petitions are disposed of with no order as to costs.
C.M. 1402/2008 As the main case has been disposed of, this C.M. Has become infructuous and disposed of as such.