| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1982 SLG 66 1982 SLD 66 1982 PTD 322 (1983) 47 TAX 16 |
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No. 5389 of 1981, decision dated: 24-01-1982. dates of hearing: 22nd, 23rd November, 21st December, 1981, 18th and 19-01-1982
SAAD SAOOD, JAN, J
Ali Bin Abdul Kadir for Petitioner. Ch. Muhammad Ishaq for
Respondent
Writ Petition No. 5389 of 1981, decision dated: 24-01-1982. dates of hearing: 22nd, 23rd November, 21st December, 1981, 18th and 19-01-1982
SAAD SAOOD, JAN, J
Ali Bin Abdul Kadir for Petitioner. Ch. Muhammad Ishaq for
Respondent
MUHAMMAD BASHIR
VS
Income Tax OFFICER, LAHORE
Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 1979
Section: 166(2)(c)(ii),13(1)(e),62,65
Law: Income Tax Act, 1922
Section: 34,
Law: General Clauses Act, 1897
Section: 14(1)
(a) Income tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)---S. 166 (2) (c) (ii) read with General Clauses Act (X of 1897), S. 14 (1) Second notice Central Act conferring power Such power can be exercised from time to time as occasion arises unless a different intention appears Nothing in S. 166 (2) (i)(ii) of Income tax Ordinance militating against a notice being issued to assessee more than once, a second notice, held, not barred. (b) Income tax Act (XI of 1922) -- S. 34 Second notice Income tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979) having not then come into force, petitioner, held, could be served with more than one notice under S. 34 of Income tax Act, 1922. Jagmohan Goenka v. K. D. Banerjee (1954) 26 I T R 637 ref. (c) Income tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979 ---Ss. 62 & 65 Assessment, reopening of Income tax Officer making assessment after considering all relevant material, cannot later on reopen proceedings merely because of having come to form a different opinion from same material Assessment proceedings however when first held, petitioner averring therein to have raised money for constructing his building from sale of ornaments and foreign remittances and Income tax Officer accepting averments on their face value but after finalisation of proceedings finding informant having supplied him false information and making assessment afresh Case, held, not one of mere change of opinion on material already available but one of discovery of new facts, hence, reopening of assessment proceedings not barred. Dr. H. K: Mahtab v. I. T. O. 1981 P T D 74; Income tax Officer v. Barkat Ali Khan Bahadur (1974) 97 I T R 239 ; K. T. Kubal & Co. Private Limited v. Commissioner of Income tax (1963) 49 I T R 433 ; Bhimraj Panna Lal v. Commissioner of Income tax (1957) 32 I T R 289 and Gordon Woodroffe & Co. Ltd. v. Income tax Ofcer 41 I T R 12 ref. (d) Income tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979) -- Ss. 62 & 65 Assessment, reopening of Contention that Income tax Officer having once accepted value of house at a certain figure he could not later on reject such value and embark upon a fresh inquiry Held Income tax Officer having material before him showing house having been grossly undervalued in first…
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