| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1981 SLG 36 1981 SLD 36 1981 PTD 71 (1980) 42 TAX 93 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal Nos. 218 and 219 of 1976, decision dated: 25-02-1980
DORAB PATEL AND NASIM HASAN SHAH, J
Mumtaz Hussain, Advocate with Sh. Masud Akhtar, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondent
Civil Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal Nos. 218 and 219 of 1976, decision dated: 25-02-1980
DORAB PATEL AND NASIM HASAN SHAH, J
Mumtaz Hussain, Advocate with Sh. Masud Akhtar, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondent
Mian MUHAMMAD SHARIF & COMPANY
VS
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAWALPINDI
Law: Income Tax Act, 1922
Section: 10,10(2),(iv),(v),(xvi)
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 185(3)
Income-tax Act (XI of 1922)---S. 10(2), (iv), (v), (xvi) read with Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)---Question whether cases can be decided relying exclusively on English foreign case-law-Whether provisions of income-tax Act, 1922 in pari materia with provisions of Foreign Income tax Act-Leave to appeal granted to examine questions. Allahabad Glass Works v. Commissioner of Income-tax (1962) P T D 327 ref. ORDER DORAD PATEL, J.--The petitioner is a, registered firm which carries on construction business. In the events that happened, it had submitted its income returns for the assessment year 1969-70 in which it had disclosed a gross profit of nearly 151 on its gross earnings. However, after preparing its accounts, it discovered that it had not claimed depreciation in the manner prescribed in section 10 of the Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter called the said Act) on its machinery and equipment. Therefore, it claimed a sum of Rs. 1,29,806 for the same and transferred this amount from its trading account into its profit and loss account. It would appear that the petitioner's assessment for returns of income thus submitted by it was made with the return submitted by it for the assessment year 1970-71. Nothing turns-on the details of the returns submitted in this order except that as in the previous year the petitioner claimed Rs. 97,683 as depreciation of its machinery equipment etc. The Income-tax Officer rejected the petitioner's returns and assessed its profits at more than 16 % of its gross receipts for the two assessment years. Further, after thus raising the assessed profits the Income-tax Officer also rejected the amounts of Rs. 1,29,806 and Rs. 97,683 claimed by the petitioner for depreciation for the assessment years 1969, 1970, 1971 respectively. Therefore, the petitioner challenged these orders in appeals before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, but as these appeals were dismissed, it filed references in the Lahore High Court under section 66(i) of the said Act. Both the references were heard together, because they arose out of similar facts and raised the…
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