Case Details

Citation(s)
2017 SLG 364 2017 SLD 364
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue, Islamabad
ITA No. 616/IB/2016 (Tax Year €“ 2013), Date of Hearing: 09.11.2016, Date of Order: 09.11.2016
SHAHID MASOOD MANZAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
Taxpayer by: Mr. Allah Ditta, ACMA Department by: Ms. Nazia Zeb, DR.

M/S C-MEDIA RAWALPINDI --Applicant

VS

CIR, RTO, RAWALPINDI --Respondent

Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

Section: 111,111(1)(a),122(1),122(5),129

THIS ORDER PASSED BY: The titled appeal is filed by taxpayer against Appellate Order No 946/2015 dated 26.01.2016 passed by CIR (Appeals-III), Rawalpindi. The appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. That the Appellate Order u/s 129 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 dated 26 - 01- 2016 and assessment order u s 122(1) read with section 122(5) and 111(1)(a) dated 30- 07-2015 is bad in law and against the facts of the case. 2. That the assessing officer has erred in passing assessment order without going into the facts of the case and deliberately overlooked the provisions of law. 3. That the Commissioner Inland Revenue has not used the judicious mind in confirming the treatment of the Taxation Officer. 4. That the Tax Officer issued notice u/s 122(9) read with section 122(1) R/W section 111(1)(a) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 with mentioning section 122(5) into the subject heading of the notice, structure of the assessment order based upon the invalid show cause notice has no legal credence and strength. 5. That the income assessed amounting to Rs. 2,675,475/- is total based upon estimation/ conjectures. There is no room of estimation, surmises, conjecture in the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001. 6. That the assessing officer has unlawfully made addition amounting to Rs. 2,015,475/- under section 111(1)(a) of the Income Tax Ordinance without considering the fact that same were not the revenue/receipts of the taxpayer rather whole amount belonged to Mr. Niamat cousin of Mr. Asif Khan) and it was duly acknowledged by him through the affidavit placed on record. It is pertinent to mention here that the taxpayer received the whole amount into various chunks from Mr. Munawar Shah, (borrower of Mr. Nimat Khan) and returned the same amount to the wife of Mr. Nimat khan. 7. That in case of suppressed receipts, heavy burden lie upon the Tax Officer to point specifics transaction i.e. from whom and in what connection it was received whether it was a sales proceed. 8. That the Bank Accounts were appearing in the wealth statement of the taxpayer Bank Statement along with Bank Reconciliation statement was provided to the OIR by the taxpayer. Revenue 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