| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2021 SLG 2334 2021 SLD 2334 2021 PTD 1737 (2022) 126 TAX 164 |
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue
I.T.A. No.573/LB of 2014, decided on 26th July, 2021, date of hearing: 13th July, 2021
ZAHID SIKANDAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER, MUHAMMAD TAHIR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Petitioner(s) by: Rao Shehzad Akhtar Ali Khan D.R.
Respondent(s) by: Aurangzeb Tahir
I.T.A. No.573/LB of 2014, decided on 26th July, 2021, date of hearing: 13th July, 2021
ZAHID SIKANDAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER, MUHAMMAD TAHIR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Petitioner(s) by: Rao Shehzad Akhtar Ali Khan D.R.
Respondent(s) by: Aurangzeb Tahir
THE COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, RTO-II, LAHORE
VS
MESSRS SAJID FLOUR MILLS (PVT.) LTD., LAHORE
Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001
Section: 68,122,174
Notes Amendment of assessment-Fair market value, determination of-Scope-Commissioner Inland Revenue assailed order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) whereby he had declared the applied sale rate of wheat of Rs. 12.25 per kg as unwarranted and had directed the taxation officer to accept the declared version of the taxpayer-Validity-Taxation officer had not conducted any sort of inquiry or investigation nor any effort was made to determine a fair market value of wheat stock-Taxation officer had not clarified that on the basis of which information he had determined the sale rate at Rs. 12.25 per kg, rather valuation appeared to be hypothetical and without any basis-Burden of assigning reason for determining the fair market value was on the assessing authority-Fair market value was determined on the basis of surmises and conjectures-Commissioner (Appeals) had rightly decided the issue-Appeal was disposed of accordingly. Magna Industries v. CIT 1980 PTD 35 rel. Amendment of assessments-Claim for deduction- Failure to produce record-Scope-Commissioner Inland Revenue assailed order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) whereby *he had disagreed with the additions made by taxation officer under S. 174(2) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, for the taxpayer's failure to submit any evidence with regard to the expenses claimed under the heads of accounts 'commission paid on wheat purchase', 'mobil oil consumed' and 'market fee'-Validity-Taxpayer had not submitted any evidence with regards to the expenses claimed-Taxation officer had went on to observe that the taxpayer had not even bothered to offer any explanation with regard to the expenses-Taxation officer was justified in disallowing the expenses claimed by the taxpayer as the expenses claimed were not verified-Commissioner (Appeals) was not justified in deleting the additions made by the taxation officer-Appeal was disposed of accordingly. Amendment of assessments-Burden of proof-Scope- Assessing authority has to establish that the declared version of the taxpayer is not correct and that too based on substance and material satisfying the judicial conscience. 2002 PTD 700 ref. Fair market value-Scope-Sections 68(1) (3) of Income…
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