Law:

Section:

ORDER 1. The instant appeal relating to tax year 2007 has been filed by the appellant against Order No. 310, 265 342/2011 dated 21st June 2011 of Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals-Il), Islamabad. 2. Brief facts relating to this appeal are that the appellant is a public limited company and derives income from providing telecommunication services. The appellant filed revised return on 30th June 2009 subsequent to which notices under Section 122(5A) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Ordinance') were issued and various additions to income were made. The appellant being aggrieved filed appeal before CIR (A) who provided partial relief by deleting the following additions: (a) Depreciation claim on submarine cables; and (b) Co-location charges of National Telecommunications Corporation 3. The above partial relief resulted in Departmental appeal ITA No. 658/IB/2011. The other additions to income were confirmed by the CIR (A) against which the appellant filed cross appeal ITA No. 663/IB/2011. ITA# 663/1B/2011 4. The appellant's grounds of appeal against order of CIR (A) are as follows: (1) That order dated 21st June 2011 passed by the Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals)-II (CIRA), Islamabad is bad in law and on facts for the following and for such further reasons as may be raised at the time of hearing of appeal. (2) That the CIRA was not justified in upholding action of the Additional Commissioner Inland Revenue (AC) to further amend an assessment deemed to have been made by the Commissioner Inland Revenue. (3) That the CIRA was not justified in upholding disallowance of trade discount amounting to Rs 4,313,541,485 merely because of the fact that the same has been upheld by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals-l) in oversight of the fact that evidence allegedly not provided during audit proceedings was produced before the AC. (4) That the CIRA erroneously upheld the disallowance of the above mentioned trade discount by ignoring binding precedents to the effect that Section 122(5A) of the Ordinance is not applicable in cases where there exists any controversy or doubts whereas this addition was originally made on the basis of…