| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1974 SLG 31 1974 SLD 31 (1974) 29 TAX 25 1973 PTD 28 |
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue
I.T.A. Nos. 4054 and 4055 of 1971-72 (Assessment years 1963-64 and 1964-65), decided on 6-5-1972
M. T. SIDDIQUI, PRESIDENT, MIAN ABDUL KHALIQ, GHULAM MURTAZA KHAN, K. SALAHUDDIN AND MUHAMMAD SALEEM CHOUDHRY, MEMBERS
Muhammad Amin Butt, Advocate, for the Appellant. S. A. Nassar, D.R., for the
Respondent
I.T.A. Nos. 4054 and 4055 of 1971-72 (Assessment years 1963-64 and 1964-65), decided on 6-5-1972
M. T. SIDDIQUI, PRESIDENT, MIAN ABDUL KHALIQ, GHULAM MURTAZA KHAN, K. SALAHUDDIN AND MUHAMMAD SALEEM CHOUDHRY, MEMBERS
Muhammad Amin Butt, Advocate, for the Appellant. S. A. Nassar, D.R., for the
Respondent
Deprecated: preg_match(): Passing null to parameter #2 ($subject) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 411
Deprecated: htmlspecialchars(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 435
Law: Income Tax Act, 1922
Section: 23A,34,35
Income-tax Act, 1922 -Sections 23A, 34, 35 -Rectification of mistake -Assessment made originally erroneosuly treating assessee as a public limited company, levying super-tax at the rate of 20 per cent instead of 25 per cent and allowing rebate of 5 per cent of super-tax -Mistake rectified under Sec. 35 after issue of show cause notice -Whether proper and valid -Held yes -Provisions of Sec. 34 and 35 -Whether mutually exclusive -Held no -Cause of action under Sec. 34 available -Whether action under Sec. 35 also permissible -Held yes -- Assessment -Rectification -Income-tax Officer allowing rebate of 5% of super tax erroneously treating assessee as a public company and levying super-tax at 20% instead of 25% -On realisation of mistake Income-tax Officer taking action under section 35 and rectifying mistake -Grievance that having once held assessee to be public company Income-tax Officer was competent to take action under section 34 and not under section 35 -Held, sections 34 & 35 are not mutually exclusive; if cause of action under section 34 available action under section 35 also permissible -- Corresponding Sections: Income-tax Ordinance, 1979 -Section 65 -- ORDER The order was passed by M.T. SIDDIQUI, President.---We propose to dispose of these two appeals by a company manufacturing textile goods as the facts and the objections are identical. 2. The two assessments under appeal were originally completed on 29-6-1968 and 31-5-1971, respectively. The same were, however, rectified under Section 35 on 7-10-1971 in the following circumstances. 3. In the original assessments the Income Tax Officer levied super tax at 20% instead of 25%. He committed this error as he took the appellant to be a public company in which the public was substantially interested within the meaning of Explanation 1 to sub-section (1) of Section 23A of the Income Tax Act and in consequence erroneously allowed a rebate of 5% of super-tax available to such a company vide sub-clause (ii) of proviso to clause (I) of para A of Part-II of the Fourth Schedule to the Finance Act, 1963 and the corresponding provisions of the Finance Act, 1964. The appellant was all along assessed as a public…
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