Case Details

Citation(s)
2012 SLG 813 2012 SLD 813 2012 PTD 1189
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue
I.T.As. Nos.1426/LB to 1429/LB of 2011, decision dated: 2-04-2012
JAWAID MASOOD TAHIR BHATTI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND M.B. TAHIR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

C.I.R., Zone-II, R.T.O., MULTAN

VS

Messrs ARAIN FIBERS LTD., MULTAN

Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

Section: 151(1)(d),161(IB)

(a) Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001)--- ----Ss. 161(IB) & 151(1)(d)---Failure to pay tax collected or deducted---Profit on debt---Taxpayer paid mark up to its associated company---Taxation Officer found that taxpayer should have deducted tax at the rate of 10% at the time of making payments of mark-up and had charged the same by treating the taxpayer as taxpayer in default---Validity---Taxpayer was not hit by any of sub-clauses of S.151 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001---Only sub-clause wherein companies had been made responsible to deduct tax was cl. (d) of S.151 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 which related to payments made in respect of profits of any bond, certificate, debenture, security or instrument of any kind---Taxation Officer failed to point out as to which of the said five items the case of the taxpayer was involved on which profit was paid by the taxpayer attracting cl.(d) of S.151(1) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001---No loan documents/instruments were available in writing and there was no decision of Board of Directors to pay mark-up on the equity of the associated companies---Mark-up was not paid through some instrument of loan on the basis of which S.151(1)(d) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 could be invoked---Profit paid to the recipients who had not even been identified by the Taxation Officer must have now been offered for taxation and were taxable at normal rate being income from other sources---Revenue failed to establish that tax in that regard had not been paid---Provisions of S.161(1B) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 came into play by excluding the clauses (a) and (b) of S.161(1B) of the Ordinance---Where at the time of recovery of tax, it was established that the tax which was to be deducted from the payment made to a person or collected from a person had meanwhile been paid by that person, no recovery shall be made from the person who had failed to collect or deduct the tax but the said person shall be liable to pay default surcharge at the rate of eighteen percent per annum from the date he failed to collect or deduct the tax to the date the tax was paid---Provision of S.161 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 was ;rot a…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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