Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

Section: 120, 122(5A), 221, 129, 127, 128

ORDER NASIR MAHMUD (MEMBER): This appeal has arisen out of the order dated 30.12.2009 passed by the Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals), Lahore [“CIR(A)”]. 2. Brief facts are that M/s  Ejaz Spinning Mills Limited (“the taxpayer”) filed its return of income for Tax Year 2007, which constituted a deemed assessment order under Section 120 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 (“the Ordinance”). The Additional Commissioner Inland Revenue (“Ad.CIR”), considering the deemed assessment erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue, issued a notice and the taxpayer contested the same. The learned Ad.CIR, however, passed an amended assessment order dated 30.03.2009 under Section 122(5A) of the Ordinance. The same was challenged through institution of rectification application under section 221 of the Ordinance. The learned Ad.CIR vide order dated 18.05.2009 disposed of the application.  4. On appeal, the learned CIR(A) vide order dated 30.12.2009 held that the main appeal filed by the Appellant against the order passed under section 122(5A) has been disposed of. It is held that the perusal of the Appellate order on order of the learned Ad.CIR under section 122(5A) as well under u/s Section 221  reveals that the grievance agitated by the Appellant have already been attended and relief where warranted and rectification where required has been made. It was further held that no issue remains unattended as rectification application stands disposed of comprehensively. Based on the above findings the learned CIR(A) disposed of the appeal filed by the Appellant. 5. Being dissatisfied second appeal has been preferred before this Tribunal on facts and grounds enumerated in the memo of appeal. 6. The learned counsel averred that the decision of appeal agasint rejection of application under section 221 of the ordinance can only be disposed of through a speaking judicial order and disposal whereof at the altar of disposal of main appeal is not sustainable. 7. The learned DR opposed the appeal and argued that when all the issues involved in dispute have been determined, there remains no justification to give finding…