Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

Section: 120,120(1),122(4)(a)(b)(5A)(9)

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O.XIV,R.2

Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001)--- ----Ss. 120 & 122(4), (5A) & (9)---Suit for declaration and injunction---Show-cause notice---Limitation---Taxpayer was aggrieved of show-cause notice stating that amended assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to interests of revenue---Plea raised by taxpayer was that show-cause notice was time-barred under S. 122(4) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001---Validity---Taxpayer was required to maintain records of all sorts for a period of six years whereas intention for providing a maximum limitation of six years in aggregate in S. 122(4) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 was in line and consonance with such period---If plea of taxpayer was accepted same would amount to replacing period of limitation in carrying out an amendment in original assessment order---Amended assessment order of taxpayer for tax year 2010 was made immediately after end of financial year on 11-07-2011 and if period of one year was available to further amend assessment order then same would end on 10-07-2012 and therefore, period of limitation was curtailed, such could not be intention of Legislature, hence plea was misconceived---Section 122(4) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 clearly provided that period of limitation for further amendment was latter of two periods given in S.122(4)(a) & (b) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001---Further amendment could always be carried out in amended assessment order as many times as could be necessary and a harmonious and purposive interpretation would be that it could be done up to a period of six years from end of financial year in which or for which assessment order had been passed or made---Show-cause notice was issued within limitation period as provided in S. 122(4)(a) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 as same pertained to tax year 2010 and period of five years was to start from end of financial year on 01-07-2011 and to end on 30.06.2016---Suit was dismissed in circumstances. Commissioner Inland Revenue v. Ch. Muhammad Akram 2013 PTD 1578; Ms. Rafi Electronics Corporation (Pvt.) Ltd. Lahore v. C.I.T., R.T.O. Lahore 2011 PTD (Trib.) 936; PLD 2013 Lah. 627; Pakistan Television Corporation Ltd. v. Commissioner of…

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