Thai Actress Nana Rybena Arrested on Fraud Allegations Involving 190 Million Baht

Punjab Information Minister Azma Bukhari has rejected allegations of electoral rigging raised by the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) following the first phase of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir elections. Speaking at a press conference in Lahore, Bukhari said the people of Kashmir had made their decision through their votes. She claimed that voters had preferred the performance of Punjab Chief Minister Maryam Nawaz. Bukhari said the election results reflected the choice of the people. She dismissed the PPP’s allegations and defended the performance of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N). The provincial minister also criticised PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari. She said political pressure appeared to be increasing within a particular party. She further claimed that Bilawal had attempted to imitate another political leader during his election speech. Bukhari also criticised the PPP’s performance in Sindh. She said the party often used the name of Raiwind to target the PML-N and its leadership. She challenged the PPP to present its performance record from the past 18 years. She also questioned the condition of Karachi, Sindh’s largest city. Bukhari said voters should compare the performance of Punjab under Maryam Nawaz with the situation in Sindh under the PPP. “Look at Maryam’s Punjab and Bilawal’s Sindh,” she said while comparing the two provinces. The minister argued that a government unable to improve roads in its own areas could not claim that it would transform roads in Kashmir. She also highlighted differences in public services between Punjab and Sindh. Bukhari said Punjab had introduced air ambulance services to provide emergency medical assistance. She claimed that Sindh, by comparison, had introduced a bicycle ambulance service. She used the comparison to criticise the PPP’s governance record and defend the PML-N’s performance in Punjab. Bukhari also discussed the education initiatives introduced by the Punjab government. She said Maryam Nawaz believed that every child should have access to educational opportunities. According to Bukhari, students should be able to receive laptops and scholarships regardless of their background. She said such programmes were aimed at supporting young people and helping them continue their education. The minister contrasted these initiatives with the situation in Sindh. She claimed that students in the province were protesting to demand better educational facilities and opportunities. Bukhari’s remarks came after the PPP questioned the credibility of the first phase of the AJK elections and alleged irregularities. The first phase covered 13 constituencies in the Mirpur division. The PML-N emerged as the leading party, winning nine seats. The PPP secured four seats. The election results have triggered a political dispute between the two parties. The PML-N has defended its victory and rejected claims that the results were manipulated. Bukhari’s latest comments further intensified the political exchange. She presented the results as an endorsement of the PML-N’s performance and Maryam Nawaz’s governance model. The remaining phases of the AJK elections are expected to keep the political competition intense. Both parties are likely to continue highlighting their respective performance records as campaigning moves forward.

The Federal Constitutional Court has issued an important ruling in favour of corporate taxpayers. The court has declared the adjustment of tax credits against super tax legally valid. It has also overturned an earlier decision of the Islamabad High Court. Justice Amir Farooq authored the six-page detailed judgment. The court accepted the appeals filed by a private mobile phone company. The case relates to the adjustment of tax credits against super tax. The company had challenged a demand raised by the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR). The FBR had issued a notice to the private company. The notice required the company to pay super tax. The company approached the Islamabad High Court after receiving the notice. It argued that its available tax credit should be allowed to adjust against the super tax liability. The Islamabad High Court rejected the company’s petition. The company then challenged that decision before the Federal Constitutional Court. The Federal Constitutional Court has now accepted the company’s appeals. It has declared that tax credits available to a taxpayer can be adjusted against super tax. The court referred to the relevant provisions of the tax law. It observed that the tax credit available under Section 168 is a separate and legally recognised right. According to the judgment, a taxpayer should not be prevented from using this credit for adjustment. The court said forcing a taxpayer to seek only a refund would not be consistent with the intention of the law. The judgment also addressed the interpretation of financial and tax laws. The court observed that such laws should be interpreted in a manner that facilitates taxpayers. The court emphasised that taxpayers should be able to exercise rights provided to them under the law. A legal right to a tax credit cannot be unnecessarily restricted through an interpretation that creates additional difficulties for taxpayers. The court also issued directions to the FBR. The FBR has been directed to examine the taxpayer’s claim for adjustment. The department must consider the claim in response to the tax notice. The FBR will now have to decide the matter according to the applicable law and the court’s ruling. The judgment provides an important clarification for corporate taxpayers. It establishes that an eligible tax credit can be considered for adjustment against a super tax liability. The ruling may also have wider implications for companies facing similar tax demands. Businesses with legally available tax credits may now rely on the court’s interpretation when seeking adjustments against their tax liabilities. By setting aside the Islamabad High Court’s decision, the Federal Constitutional Court has clarified the legal position on the issue. The case also highlights the continuing dispute between taxpayers and the FBR over the interpretation and application of tax laws.