| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2024 SLG 5312 2024 SLD 5312 = (2024) 130 TAX 368 = 2025 PTD 231 = 2025 SCMR 240 |
C.R.P.870/2023 in C.P.L.A.2166-L/2023, decided on: 15.03.2024. Date of hearing: 15.03.2024 (For review of this Court’s order dated 08.08.2023 passed in CP No. 2166-L/2023)
PRESENT: JAMAL KHAN MANDOKHAIL, SYED HASAN AZHAR RIZVI AND MUSARRAT HILALI, JJ.
Sh. Muhammad Akram, ASC (via video link from Lahore) for the Petitioners. Ch. Muhammad Zafar Iqbal, ASC for the State.
AHMAD SIKANDER
VS
COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, AEOI ZONE, LAHORE
Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001
Section: 111,111(1)(b),122(9),128(5)
INCOME TAX ORDINANCE, 2001 (XLIX OF 2001)----Sections: 111, 111(1)(b), 122(9) & 128(5) - Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order XLVII, Rule: 1 - Supreme Court Rules, 1980, Order XXVI, Rule: 1 - Unexplained income or assets - Amendment of assessments - Procedure in appeal - Petitioner maintaining bank account in U.K, but did not disclose it in the wealth statement - Show cause notices u/s 122(9) and u/s 111 issued - Petitioner charged to tax u/s 111(1)(b) - Appeal filed before the CIT(A), dismissed, but however, allowed by the Appellate Tribunal - Income tax reference filed by the Respondent in the High Court was allowed, but civil petition filed in the Supreme Court dismissed - Filing of review petition by the petitioner - Validity -
FACTS
Precisely facts of the case are that a show cause notice under section 122(9) and a notice under section 111 were issued to the petitioner. It was alleged that the petitioner was maintaining bank account in UK but did not disclose it in his wealth statement, hence, concealed the material fact. The Assessment Officer did not accept the explanation advanced by the petitioner who was charged to tax under section 111(1)(b) of the Ordinance. Appeal before the Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals-I), Lahore, was dismissed so an ITA was filed before the Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue, Lahore (“Tribunalâ€), which was allowed. Against the said order, the respondent filed a reference before the Lahore High Court which was allowed. The petitioner filed civil petition before this Court which was dismissed hence this review petition.
ARGUMENTS
Learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contends that the petitioner has submitted his returns with all the necessary details and nothing was concealed. He submits that all the necessary documents including the foreign income and asset statement along with bank statement and foreign loan documents were e- filed which were available at e-Portal of FBR. He adds that all these documents were supplied to the respondent through TCS as well, but the same were not considered by the fora below.