| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2022 SLG 893 2022 SLD 893 2022 PTD 809 |
Lahore High Court
P.T.R. No. 708 of 2008, decided on 9th June, 2021
ABID HUSSAIN CHATTHA, JUSTICE
Shahid Sarwar Chahil for Applicant-department. Muhammad Ajmal Khan for
Respondent-taxpayer.
P.T.R. No. 708 of 2008, decided on 9th June, 2021
ABID HUSSAIN CHATTHA, JUSTICE
Shahid Sarwar Chahil for Applicant-department. Muhammad Ajmal Khan for
Respondent-taxpayer.
COMMISSIONER OF Income Tax LEGAL DIVISION, RTO, LAHORE
VS
MESSRS MECO (PVT.) LTD. LAHORE
Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 1979
Section: 64
Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001
Section: 50(4),52,86,133,133(5)
Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)[Since repealed]-- S.64- Limitation for assessment- Scope- Question before High Court was whether time limitation for an assessment also included the time consumed in service of order, whereas S. 64 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, determined the time limitation for an assessment only- Held, that a decision could not be said to have taken place as and when its hearing had concluded- Necessary that an adjudicatory decision be declared and duly communicated to the parties- Date of service of order would be considered to be the date of decision- Reference was decided against the department and in favour of the taxpayer.Messrs Mujahid Soap and Chemical Industries (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Customs Appellate Tribunal, Bench-I, Islamabad and others 2019 SCMR 1735 = 2019 PTD 1961 foll.ORDER:Through this Reference Application under section 133 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 (�Ordinance of 2001�), following question of law, asserted to have arisen out of impugned order dated 06.08.2008, passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Lahore (�Appellate Tribunal�), has been proposed for our opinion:-�Whether as per facts and circumstances of the case, the learned ITAT was justified to hold that time limitation for an assessment also includes the service of order, whereas section 64 of the repealed Ordinance determines the time limitation for an assessment only?�2. Brief facts of the case are that assessing officer issued notice dated 06.04.2002 requiring respondent-taxpayer to provide evidence of income tax deducted under section 50(4) of the Ordinance of 2001, on various payments including purchases, which remained unattended and resulted in charging tax under sections 52/86 on purchases amounting to Rs.23,00,000/- against the confronted figure of Rs.25,69,023/-, vide order dated 15.05.2002. Feeling aggrieved, respondent-taxpayer filed appeal before CIT (Appeals), which was disposed of while remanding the case for de novo consideration, vide order dated 20.03.2004. Re assessment was completed by again charging tax under Sections 52/86 of the Ordinance, ibid vide order dated 18.06.2005. The respondent taxpayer again…
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