Case Details

Citation(s)
1987 SLG 48 1987 SLD 48 1987 PTD 384 (1987) 56 TAX 24
Sindh High Court
W.P. Nos. D-762 and D-763 of 1986, decision dated: 10-12-1986
MUHAMMAD ZAHOORUL HAQ, JUSTICE SAJJAD ALI SHAH, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Muhammad Nasim
Respondent(s) by: Shaikh Hyder

MESSRS BRILLIANT FABRICS & SILK FACTORY, KARACHI

VS

Income Tax OFFICER, WEST ZONE, KARACHI AND 4 OTHERS

Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 1979

Section: 59,157

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 199

(a) Income-tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)--S. 59--Self-Assessment Scheme, 1982-83, para. 9--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199--Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court-­Findings of Income-tax Officer and Appellate Authority of the Department that assessee was guilty of concealment and suppression--Such findings being findings of fact and not shown by assessee to be completely wrong, held, could not be interfered with by High Court in its constitutional jurisdiction. (b) Income-tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)-- --S. 157--Counsel and client--Associate of firm of counsel appearing for assessee--Client, held, could not claim that he was not properly represented. (c) Income-tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)-- ---S. 59--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199--Contention of petitioner that he sent a letter of protest to the Department against certain proceedings--Department in its comments stating that such letter of assessee was never received--No contravention of Department's comments in respect of receipt of letter existed in rejoinder of petitioner--Issue being controversial question of fact, held, was not fit issue to be determined under supervisory constitutional jurisdiction of High Court. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: MUHAMMAD ZAHOORUL HAQ, JUSTICE:---.--- This order disposes of Petitions Nos. D-762 and D-763. Heard Mr. Nasim Advocate for the petitioner who seeks setting aside of orders of assessment, order in appeal and order in revision by Income-tax Authorities. Heard also Mr. Shaikh Hyder Advocate for the respondents. The contention of Mr. Nasim was that the petitioner could not be directed to produce the accounts or give information in respect of his return for the year 1982-83 as it was immune from scrutiny. Learned counsel had relied upon the circular of Central Board of Revenue which had provided that in those cases where the assessee had been immune from scrutiny in the earlier years the scrutiny clause will not be applied against him. In. opposition of this case Mr. Shaikh Hyder, had relied upon para 9 of the Self-Assessment Scheme which itself "had provided that in cases where there was positive evidence of concealment then the provisions of the…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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