| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2012 SLG 66 2012 SLD 66 2012 PTD 1133 |
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
I.T.A. No. 233/LB of 2012, decision dated: 29-03-2012
, JAWAID MASOOD TAHIR BHATTI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND M.B. TAHIR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Riaz Ahmad Raja, ITP for Appellant. Asif Rasool, D.R. for
Respondent.
I.T.A. No. 233/LB of 2012, decision dated: 29-03-2012
, JAWAID MASOOD TAHIR BHATTI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND M.B. TAHIR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Riaz Ahmad Raja, ITP for Appellant. Asif Rasool, D.R. for
Respondent.
Messrs CHICAGO METAL WORKS, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, MULTAN
VS
COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, MULTAN
Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001
Section: 111,177(1),174,122(5),122(9),111(1),67
Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001)-----Ss. 177 (1), 174, 122(5), 122(9), 111(1) & 67---Audit---Taxpayer was selected for audit on the basis of variations in sales shown in income tax return and sales shown in sales tax record and variations in purchases indicted in income tax return and in sales tax profile; and further, verification of manufacturing and trading expenses, profit and loss expenses and applicability of S.67 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 was also required to be ascertained---Show cause notice was issued and explanation submitted by the taxpayer was found unsatisfactory; and addition was made---Taxpayer contended that sales and purchases profile of the registered unit which was doing business of tractor parts had been used which had no relevance as NTN of their unit in appeal had been newly allotted with another sales tax number and filed income tax return accordingly; and from March to June, sales tax return was filed with new name and NTN but with old Sales Tax Registration; and such facts had neither been taken into considerations by the Taxation Officer nor by the First Appellate Authority; and applied sales and purchase figure of totally different company which had no standing---Validity---Whole case had been framed on the basis of sales and purchase profile of another company with a separate NTN and registration number under Sales Tax Act, 1990 having a different line of business---Basic facts had neither been thrashed out by the Adjudication Officer nor by the First Appellate Authority despite repeated pointations---Sales and purchase date of a company with a different NTN and Sales Tax Registration numbers could not be made the basis for working out liability against the taxpayer having a different National Tax Number and Sales Tax Registration numbers and production line---Order was set aside by the Appellate Tribunal and case was remanded to the Adjudication Officer for a fresh decision after hearing the taxpayer, verifying the facts and reconciliation of the facts on grounds from the record and passing a speaking order. ORDER The titled appeal has been .filed at the instance of Messrs Chicago Metal Works No. 9-D/1 Industrial…
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