Case Details

Citation(s)
2002 SLG 10 2002 SLD 10 2002 PTD 270
Lahore High Court
C. T. R. No. 23 of 1989, heard on 2-10-2000, hearing DATE :2-10-2000
NASIM SIKANDAR AND, JAWAD S. KHAWAJA, JJ
Sh. Maqbool Ahmad for Petitioner. Muhammad Ilyas Khan for
Respondent.

Messrs NIDAI MILLAT LTDVs.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 1979

Section: 130,130(3)

(a) Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 197.9)----S.130(3)---Limitation---Service of notice---Appeal barred by limitation---Assessee was properly served for the date of hearing---No separate notice was required to confront the assessee that its appeal was barred by limitation. (b) Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)---S.130(3)---Limitation---Delay of one day---No application for condonation of delay---Rejection of appeal---When no application for condonation of delay was made before the Commissioner nor an excuse was put up before him, he was well within his domain to reject the appeal as barred by limitation. (c) Income-tax--- ----Forum exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions was not required to confront the party of the natural consequence of the default made on his part. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY NASIM SIKANDAR, J.---The Lahore Bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal at the instance of the assessee a private limited company deriving income from publication of newspapers has referred the following questions of law said to have arisen out of a consolidated order recorded on 23-10-1983 by the Tribunal for the assessment years 1975-76: --- (i) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) whereby he had dismissed the assessee's appeal in limine as being barred by time? (ii) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal should hale modified or vacated the order of the Commissioner of Income�tax (Appeals) for the reason that even if the assessee was not represented before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on the date of hearing he was obliged under subsection (3) of section 130 of the Ordinance to allow the assessee a further opportunity of being heard if he intended to dismiss the appeal as barred by time? 2. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed an appeal before C.I.T. (Appeals) against the assessment order, dated 25-9-1985 framed ' for the year 1975-76. According to the order of the C.I. T. (Appeals) dated 21-12-1985 the petitioner failed to…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492