Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

Section: 21(C),114,115(4),121,148(7),148A,151(3), 152(1BB),152(1AAA),154(4),156(3),156A(2) ,161,162,169,174,177,205,233(1),233(3),2 34A,DivisionIV ofPartV ofChapterX,PartV ofChapterXorChapterXII

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 199

Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 1979

Section: 50

THIS ORDER PASSED BY: SHAHID MASOOD MANZAR, CHAIRMAN:---.--- The titled appeal has been filed by the appellant/taxpayer against the Order-In-Appeal Nos. 26/2017 dated 20.07.2017 passed by the Learned Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals-II), Islamabad for the tax year, 2015 on the following grounds of appeal:- Grounds:- Grounds: 1. That notices discussed in the impugned order was never ever been communicated, served or issued upon the appellant which is against the norms of justice. 2. That the IRO was illegally issued show cause Notices as well as original order with notice of tax demand which was delivered through UMS on wrong address i.e. Tarlai Kalan, Islamabad. (Detail Track Reports of Pakistan post (UMS) is annexed herewith). 3. That as for as the chargeability of withholding tax u/s 161 of the ITO, 2001 of Rs. 4,974,362/- is concerned the working of tax with so called formulas was totally based upon surmises, conjectures and against the accounting principles and not supported by tax laws. Thus order passed and levied of tax is unlawful. That the default surcharge charged u/s 205 of the TTO, 2001 on imaginary figure of so called tax demand was also based upon guess work without applying legal approach of mind. Thus the default surcharge of Rs. 1,189,758/- is illegal, arbitrary and harsh. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessing officer observed that taxpayer failed to fully discharge its legal obligation as a withholding agent while making payments under the heads purchases and expenses regarding which the taxpayer was confronted through notices asking for various details/documents and on non-compliance impugned order was passed by subjecting to tax payments made under deferent heads of accents/expenses for want of proof which is the subject matter of present appeal. Being aggrieved the appellant filed appeal before the CIR (A), against order passed who confirmed the order of the assessing officer. 3. The order of the learned CIR (Appeals-II) Islamabad is reproduced below: - "I have perused the arguments of the AR and given due consideration it is observe that the assessing officer has provided number of opportunities to the taxpayer to explain…

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