Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

Section: 138

INCOME TAX ORDINANCE, 2001, (XLIX OF 2001) Section: 138 - Recovery of tax out of property and through arrest of tax payer - Recovery of tax demand - Refusal of request for the grant of stay order by the CIR(A) - Filing of miscellaneous application for the grant of stay along with supporting appeal by the applicant before Appellate Tribunal - Validity - Coining to court with clean hands - Concept of - FACTS From perusal of the records, it is vivid that the taxpayer's appeal is time barred as the stay order was refused vide order No.962 dated 27.05.2019 and the instant appeal was filed on 13.09.2019 which is hopelessly time barred. Further, it was also noted that the taxpayer had filed appeal over appeal for one cause of action. Firstly appeal bearing ITA (Interim No.722/KB/2019 was filed against the stay rejection order No. CIR(A-II)/2019/962 dated 27.05.2019 which was decided and dismissed being infructuous vide order dated 17.06.2019. However, due to lack of proper assistance by the representatives of the parties, the Tribunal vide order mentioned supra, instead of dismissing the stay application directed the department not to proceed for recovery of tax demand until and unless 15 days prior notice u/s. 138 is given to the taxpayer and also directed that no bank accounts of the taxpayer be attached without prior notice of 15 days time. The taxpayer again filed another appeal bearing ITA No.886/KB/2019 against the same order No. CIR(A-II)/2019/962 dated 27.05.2019 which was again decided and dismissed as infructuous. The taxpayer again filed the instant appeal against the same cause i.e. against the order of the learned CIR(A) whereby he rejected the stay application. The tendency of filing of time barred appeal is nothing but wasting the precious time of the Court as this is the 3ld appeal on the same order of the learned CIR(A). Hence, the taxpayer has no locus standi to file the instant appeal against the same cause of action which was decided twice and therefore, no lis is pending before this Tribunal. ARGUMENTS The learned A.R. appeared on behalf of the Applicant/Appellant and vehemently argued that the learned CIR(A) was not justified to reject 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