Case Details

Citation(s)
2011 SLG 50 2011 SLD 50 (2012) 105 TAX 58 2011 PTD 1950 2011 PTR 95
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue
I.T.A. No. 589/IB of 2009, decision dated: 15-02-2011hearing DATE : 15-02-2011
MUNSIF KHAN MINHAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND IKRAM ULLAH GHAURI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Tahir Khan, D.R. for Appellant

60..

Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

Section: 20,21,22,23,24,49,113,122,153,177,113(2) (c),122(1),20(1),21(c),24(11),24(3),49(3 )

(a) Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001)----Ss.122 & 177---Amendment of assessment---Definite information---Information gathered through audit---Taxpayer contended that assessment order could only be amended on the basis of definite information; and details of expenses which were claimed were gathered through audit which did not constitute definite information and the order passed by the Assessing Officer was illegal, null and void ---Department contended that issue raised was procedural one and law favoured adjudication on merit rather than technicalities; and taxpayer was appraised through show-cause notice on the grounds of the assessment which contained detailed account of the basis on which expenses claimed were declared inadmissible ; and grounds contained in the show-cause notice constituted definite information; and show-cause notice also listed the discrepancies noticed by the Taxation Officer in the income tax return---Validity---Not only there was a full disclosure of definite information to the taxpayer but also sufficient opportunity of being heard was provided to the taxpayer who after giving consideration to the taxpayer's point of view passed a valid order under S.122(1) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001---No legal infirmity in the revised assessment order of the Taxation Officer having been found the same was sustained by the Appellate Tribunal. (b) Income Tax--- ----Commercial expediency--- Meanings--- Expression 'commercial expediency' means and includes an expenditure which a prudent man might incur for the purpose of business provided it was not entirely gratuitous and unconnected with the business. (c) Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001)--- ----Ss.21 & 122---S.R.O. 391(I)/2001 dated 18-8-2001---Deductions not allowed---Taxpayer a cellular company---Disallowance of amortized expenses of activation tax---Validity---Collection of activation tax was not related to for the purpose of business but merely as a consequence of a charge on the customer to have been collected in the capacity of withholding agent; and there was no element of any commercial expediency involved---Claiming of expenses on activation charges on its profit and gains…
🔒
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