Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

Section: 65,65-D,111(1)(d)(i),111(1)(c),113B,121, 122,122(1),153(7),153(7)(1)(i),161,161(1 )(B),175,175(1),175(1)(a),175(1)(b),175( 1)(c),175(1)(d),175(1)(e),175(7)

ORDER: IMTIAZ AHMED (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER):- These appeals have been filed by an individual against orders. No. 125/2020, 126/2020&127/2020 dated 03.09.2020 passed by CIR (A-II) Islamabad. As per facts, a raid was conducted on business premises of the taxpayer by I&I directorate of FBR. They impounded the account books and prepared a report in respect of tax deductions required to be made by the taxpayer. This report was forwarded to the assessing officer who observed that the taxpayer did not duly discharge his legal obligations as withholding agent while making payments to different suppliers/venders. Show-cause notice was issued by the assessing officer requiring the taxpayer to furnish the details and evidence of tax deductions made during the period under appeal. The explanation furnished by the taxpayer was treated as unsatisfactory for the reason that sufficient evidence of withholding tax deductions was allegedly not furnished. Therefore three separate orders were passed by assessing officer bearing No. 2018, 2019 & 2020 dated 08.06.2020 by treating the taxpayer as taxpayer-in-default, creating tax liability of Rs. 17,829,799/- for tax year 2015, Rs. 14,110,555/- for tax year 2016 and Rs. 17,423,568/- for tax year 2017. The taxpayer filed appeal against these orders challenging impugned order u/s 161 on factual as well as legal grounds. The CIR (A) Islamabad vide his impugned order dated 03.09.2020 remanded all the three orders for fair proceedings with the directions that the taxpayer should be provided access to impounded record so that he is able to reconcile the tax deductions as withholding agent. The taxpayer filed appeals before this forum against this appellate order on the following grounds. (Common for all the years) 1. That both the orders of Assistant Director (Withholding Tax) Inland Revenue, Unit-3, Range-I, Regional Tax Office Abbottabad, and CIR (A) are bad in the eyes of law and contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. That the ex-parte order is illegal. 3. That the order of Assistant Director (WHT) is without jurisdiction. 4. The CIR (A) instead of annulling the assessment set it aside. This is illegal and unjustified. It…

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