Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

Section: 21(l),21l,22,23,34(5),39(3),128(1A),131, 174(2),177(10),177,111(1)(b),121(1)(d),1 22(1)(d),214C

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 4,10A

ORDER OF APPEAL CH.SHAHID IQBAL DHILLON (JUDICIAL MEMBER): The Appellant through this appeal has objected against the impugned order of the learned CIR(A) dated 16-02-2016 on the following grounds and additional grounds - i) That the appellate/ impugned order-in appeal No 27 dated 16 02 2016 was received on 21 02.2016, hence this appeal is in time in terms of Section 131 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001. ii) That The appellant being a Contractor/Supplier of its products to the Pakistan Ordinance Factories Wah, falls in the jurisdiction of Zoned, RTO, Lahore in view of Board's Jurisdiction Order dated 01.03 2011 During Audit and the Appeal Proceedings this very fact of Jurisdiction was intimated to Respondent No.3 and Respondent No.2, respectively but, Learned DCIR and 1st Appellate Authority were perhaps bent upon to arbitrarily proceed on out of jurisdiction. Whereas, the Apex Courts have announced, out of jurisdiction assessment as null and void and even fraud on the law, 2006 PTD 219(Trib.) and 2011 PTD (Trib.) 1943. Such order along with super structure must fall to the ground, PTCL 1996 CL 1 (HC Lah). An order passed without jurisdiction/ In excess of jurisdiction, is voids ab initio, and illegal, 2006 PTD (Trib.) 2607 & 2008 PTD (Trib.) 1625. Jurisdiction cannot be given by consent and filing of return is not a waiver, 1986 PTD (Trib.) 314; 1990 PTD 1; 1999 PTD 4037; 1990 PTD 389. Jurisdictions provisions are mandatory and cannot be waived (1978) 113 ITR 22. Copy of each judgment is enclosed. iii) That, Respondent No.2 while deciding appeal has not applied his discrete mind Absence of mind is evident from the fact that the case was discussed for stay u/ 128(1A) of the income Tax Ordinance, 2001, but, he decided the main appeal, that too, without dilating in each of the FOUR Grounds, especially the first and foremost ground of Jurisdiction Further, on 1st page the Respondent No. 2 States that case was selected by the Commissioner for Audit u/s 177 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, whereas, at page/4 of the same order he changes the instance and holds that the case was selected u/s 214C of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001. ADDITIONAL GROUNDS That the…

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