Case Details

Citation(s)
2018 SLG 1223 2018 SLD 1223 2018 PTD 991
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue
I.T.A. No. 942/KB of 2012, decision & hearing Date : 30-10-2015
MRS. AMBREEN ASLAM, JUDICIAL MEMBER, FAHEEMUL HAQ KHAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
None for Appellant. Udha Ram for
Respondent.

COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, R.T.O., SUKKUR

VS

M/S. NABI BUX GOLD SMITH, UBARO

Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

Section: 122(3),122(4)(a),122(5A),177

Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001)--- ----Ss. 122(3)(5-A) & 177---Amendment of assessment---Taxpayer, a goldsmith, filed return of income for tax year 2006 which was revised as a result of proceedings conducted under S.177 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001---Additional Commissioner Inland Revenue/ Adjudicating Authority amended the assessment enhancing the amount of income on the ground that taxpayer had ventured in the business of "land development/real estate business" along with business of goldsmith and said source of income was not determined---Validity---No plausible material was available on record which could reveal the source of information of the adjudicating authority from where the said authority confirmed regarding carrying on estate business by the taxpayer---Fishing enquiries, were not permissible to invoke provisions of S.122(5-A) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001---Amendment of assessment , otherwise was made after prescribed time of limitation enumerated under S. 122(4)(a) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001---Order passed by appellate authority, did not require interference and same was upheld, in circumstances. Muhammad Azim v. CIT, East Zone Karachi 1991 PTD 658 and 1999 PTD 524 ref. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: MRS. AMBREEN ASLAM, (JUDICIAL MEMBER):---.--- Through this Order, we intend to dispose of the captioned appeal filed by the department against the Order No. 162 dated 28-9-2012, passed by the learned Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals-III), Karachi @ Hyderabad on the following grounds: i. That the order passed by the learned Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals-III) Karachi @ Hyderabad is bad in law and on facts. ii. That the learned Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals) was not justified to annul the order passed by the Additional Commissioner Inland Revenue, Audit, Zone-I, Sukkur under section 122(5A) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001. iii. That the taxpayer had filed return of income for tax year 2006 at Rs.150,000/- showing income from the business of Gold Smith. The case was selected for audit under section 177 of I.Tax. Ord. 2001 for tax year 2006. The original assessment was amended under section 122(3) of Income Tax Ord: 2001…
🔒
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