UNIPETROL NIGERIA PLC VS EDO STATE BOARD OF INTERNAL REVENUE - Legalpedia | The Complete Lawyer - Research | Productivity | Health

UNIPETROL NIGERIA PLC VS EDO STATE BOARD OF INTERNAL REVENUE

OLORI MOTORS & COMPANY LTD VS UNION BANK OF NIGERIA PLC
June 6, 2025
WEST CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LTD VS SANTOS M. BATALHA
June 6, 2025
OLORI MOTORS & COMPANY LTD VS UNION BANK OF NIGERIA PLC
June 6, 2025
WEST CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LTD VS SANTOS M. BATALHA
June 6, 2025
Show all

UNIPETROL NIGERIA PLC VS EDO STATE BOARD OF INTERNAL REVENUE

Legalpedia Citation: (2006-04) Legalpedia 90275 (SC)

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Abuja

Fri Apr 7, 2006

Suit Number: SC.286/2001

CORAM


I. L. KUTIGI JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

A. I. KATSINA-ALU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

I. C.P.ACHOLONU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

G. A. OGUNTADE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

A. M. MUKHTAR JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT


PARTIES


UNIPETROL NIGERIA PLC

APPELLANTS 


EDO STATE BOARD OF INTERNAL REVENUE

RESPONDENTS 


AREA(S) OF LAW


CAUSE OF ACTION

 

CRIMINAL ACTION- POWER TO INSTITUTE PROCEEDINGS

 

 


SUMMARY OF FACTS

The respondent  framed a two-count charge against the appellant at the mobile revenue court  Edo State, instituting criminal proceedings against the appellant for its failure to pay tax in contravention of income tax law of old Bendel State applicable in Edo State. The appellant contended that the respondent lacks power to institute the action and has appealed to the supreme court to set aside the decision of the court of appeal.

 

 


HELD


The Court held that the respondent was clearly empowered by the income tax law to institute criminal proceedings and the power to institute criminal proceedings is not limited to the Attorney – General alone.

 

 


ISSUES


Whether the respondent could validly undertake the pending criminal charge against the appellant in its corporate name.

 

 


RATIONES DECIDENDI


INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES


The cardinal principle of law of interpretation is that a court when interpreting a provision of a statute must give the words and the language used their simple and ordinary meaning, and not to venture outside it by introducing extraneous matters that may lead to circumventing or giving the provision an entirely different interpretation to what the law maker intended it to be. PER MUHKTAR JSC

 

 


CASES CITED


Lawal V. G.B. Olivant (1972) 3 S.C. 124

Toriola V. Williams (1982) 7 S.C. 27.

Abioye V. Yakubu (1991) 5 NWLR 190 page 130.

 

 


STATUTES REFERRED TO


Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1979

Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999

Income Tax Law, Cap. 71 Vol. III, Laws of Bendel State applicable in Edo State

Income Tax Law, Cap. 71, Laws of Edo State 1976

 

 


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT

Comments are closed.