| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2024 SLG 16 2024 SLD 16 2024 PTD 129 130 TAX 304 |
Islamabad High Court
Income Tax Reference No.40 of 2021, decided on 27th March,2023.
Before Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan and Babar Sattar, JJ
Barrister Atif Rahim Burki for Applicant. Ch. Imran-ul-Haq for
Respondent.
Income Tax Reference No.40 of 2021, decided on 27th March,2023.
Before Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan and Babar Sattar, JJ
Barrister Atif Rahim Burki for Applicant. Ch. Imran-ul-Haq for
Respondent.
COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, LEGAL ZONE CORPORATIVE TAX OFFICE, ISLAMABAD
VERSUS
Messrs T.F. PIPES LIMITED COMPANY LIMITED
Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001
Section: 174,161,133
Law: Income Tax Rules, 2001
Section: 44(4)
Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001)--- ----Ss. 174, 161 & 133---Income Tax Rules, 2002, R.44(4)---Failure to provide record/information---Failure to pay tax collected or deducted---Withholding obligations---Scope---Tax Department contended that the proceedings were initiated against the taxpayer/company in wake of its failure to provide information, which contention had been denied by the taxpayer throughout---Validity---Regarding the requisite information, there was no clarity in the impugned order passed by the Inland Revenue Appellate Tribunal ('the Tribunal') as it had not been explicitly stated that whether the same (requisite information) was submitted or not; and that the Tribunal on such basis determined that no demand could be generated in terms of S.161 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 ('the Ordinance, 2001')---Tribunal appeared to have misunderstood that the demand generated might have been generated in terms of the best judgment rule applicable under S. 121 of the Ordinance, 2001 as opposed to being generated in view of the taxpayer's failure to discharge withholding obligation under S.161 of the Ordinance, 2001---Tribunal did not take into account the fact that within the Show Cause Notice the application was also put to notice to file a reconciliation statement under R. 44(4) of the Income Tax Rules, as it had observed that Tax Department did not bother to obtain a reconciliation statement for said purpose, which finding was incorrect in view of available record---Question, in the present case, related to the obligation of both the Tax Department and the taxpayer with regard to withholding obligations for the purpose of the Ordinance. 2001 and the manner in which onus could shift from one party to the other depending on whether tax payer had filed requisite record within the Tax Department---Question of fact and the manner in which the Tax Department could generate a demand against a taxpayer also remained to be addressed---Commissioner Inland Revenue might observe record (the response filed by the taxpayer, assessment order, database) to identify the individual transactions in relation to which the taxpayer had allegedly failed to discharge his…
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