Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

Section: 161,165,205,152(4A)

Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 1979

Section: 52,62,86,50(4)

ORDER Through these two Appeals for the Tax Years 2011 and 2012 impugned the Orders Nos. 251 and 252 both dated 18-12-2013 of the learned CIR(A)-I, have been objected whereby the learned first appellate authority remanded the Order passed under sections 161/205 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 to DCIR for de novo consideration. The appellant is of the view that the learned CIR(A) should have vacated the order passed by the DCIR instead of allowing her another opportunity to repeat the same arbitrary and high handed treatment. 2. Facts relevant for the-disposal of the instant appeals, briefly stated, are that in order to ascertain the level of compliance with the withholding provisions by the appellant, the DCIR, Enforcement-II, Zone-III, LTU, Islamabad initiated proceedings under section 161 of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 and requisitioned various details and information pertaining to compliance with the withholding provisions of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001. From the perusal of the Orders passed by the DCIR as well as the learned first appellate authority, it transpires that the Order under sections 161/205 of the ITO, 2001 was passed by the DCIR owing to non-compliance by the appellant with the statutory notices issued from time to time. The learned first appellate authority, however, observed that the audited accounts which contained material information for ascertaining the level of compliance with the withholding provisions were available with the Taxation Officer but she did not bother to examine these accounts and identify the transactions on the basis of which the appellant could be treated as a taxpayer in default in terms of sections 161/205. Perusal of the appellate order further reveals that, according to the first appellate authority, the DCIR while passing 'the Order under sections 161/205 did not exercise due care and subjected to tax even those payments which were covered by exemption under S.R.O. 586(I)/1991 dated 30-6-1991 or were otherwise not liable to withholding provisions because of being non-cash items or where the actual payments had not been made till the closing date. Accordingly he held the Order passed under sections 161/205 as…

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