Case Details

Citation(s)
SLG 2020 (2019) 126 SLD 2020 (2019) 120 TAX 113 (2020) 126 PTD 940
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue
I.T.A. No. 863 to 866/KB/2017, decision Dated: 06-03-2019, hearing Date : 17-05-2018
MUHAMMAD, JAWED ZAKARIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SYED AYAZ MAHMOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER.
Muhammad Irtiza, ITP, for the Appellant. Ashok Kumar, DR., for the
Respondent.

M/S. HONDA PALACE, HYDERABAD

VS

THE CIR WIIT ZONE, RTO, HYDERABAD

Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

Section: 153(7),165(5),182,182(1)(1A)(2)

INCOME TAX ORDINANCE, 2001 (XLIX OF 2001) Section: 182(2) - Offences and penalties - Taxpayer is an AOP engaged in business of cars showroom - Late filing of nil statement u/s 165 - DCIR withholding tax charged penalty for the month of November, 2016, September, 2016 January, 2016 & December, 2015 - CIR (A) confirmed the imposition of penalties - Challenge to - FACTS Brief facts of the case as gleaned from the records are that the taxpayer is an AOP engaged in business of Cars Show Room. The DCIR withholding tax Unit-II, RTO, Hyderabad charged penalty u/s. 182(2) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 at Rs. 100,000 for the month of November, 2016, Rs.216,000 for month of September, 2016, 797,500 for the month of January, 2016 and Rs. 270,000 for the month of December, 2015. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the orders of the DCIR the taxpayer filed appeals before the learned CIR(A) who vide orders mentioned supra confirmed the imposition of penalties, hence the instant appeal before this Tribunal. ARGUMENTS The learned counsel for the taxpayer/appellant vehemently contended that the proceedings were initiated with the issue of show cause notice whereby the Officer intended to impose the penalty at Rs. 10,000 under serial No. (1A) of sub-section (1) of section 182 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, but imposed the penalty at the different figures which were not confronted by the officer through show cause notices. Further, the Officer has not confronted the number of days of default and quantum of penalty imposed for the default of non/late filing of statement u/s. 165 ibid which is against the principle of natural justice, hence the penalty orders are not sustainable in the eyes of law. He further submitted that the taxpayer had filed voluntarily NIL statements for the above periods and no tax was deductible, therefore, there was no loss of revenue and penalty imposed is just in excess and abuse of powers. He also submitted that before issuance of show cause notice the taxpayer had already e-filed withholding statements which fact is apparent from the body of the penalty orders passed by the respective officers. In support of his arguments he placed…
🔒
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