Case Details

Citation(s)
1992 SLG 13 1992 SLD 13 1992 PTD 45 (1992) 65 TAX 153
Sindh High Court
Constitutional Petition No.D-1396 of 1987, decision dated: 10-02-1991. dates of hearing: 15th and 16-01-1991
SALEEM AKHTAR AND MUHAMMAD ASLAM ARAIN, JJ
Fazle Ghani Khan for Petitioner. Shaikh Haider for
Respondents

Haji ISMAIL IBRAHIM

VS

Income Tax OFFICER, CIRCLE W-II, WEST ZONE, KARACHI and 2 others

Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 1979

Section: 65,59

Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)---Ss.65 & 59---C.B.R. Circular No.13 of 1986---Self-Assessment Scheme (1986-1987)---Assessee's case having been selected for total audit the preconditions imposed under S.65(2) could not be pressed into service for vitiating the re-opening of the case. Edulji Dinshaw's case PLD 1990 SC 399; Arfat Woollen Mills Ltd.'s case PLD 1990 SC 390; Republic Motor's case 1990 PTD 889; M/s. Ramzan Sons v. Income Tax Officer 1991 PTD 503; H.M. Abdullah v. Income Tax Officer 1991 PTD 217 and 1990 PTD 873 ref. JUDGMENT SALEEM AKHTAR, J.--- The petitioner is the sole proprietor of M/s. Ismail Ibrahim Co., and was assessed under the self-assessment scheme. In the assessment year 1986-1987 the petitioner filed his return of income on the basis that no accounts were maintained. The Income Tax Officer passed the assessment order under section 59(1). On 9th May, 1987 respondent No.l issued notice for commencing proceedings under section 65 of the Income Tax Ordinance. While pointing out to calculations and figures he stated that in the return filed under section 55 the petitioner had not disclosed true particulars of his income which had remained under-assessed. The petitioner denying the allegations stated that his case was covered by no account estimate case as contemplated by Circular No.13 of the Central Board of Revenue, and therefore, there was no such discrepancy which may warrant the threatened action. Respondent No.l by letter, dated 25-8-1987 then called upon the petitioner to produce documents, details of sales, bank statement, particulars of the bonded warehouse where goods were kept and break up of the capital as required by note 4(b) of the Wealth Statement. The petitioner sought several adjournments and ultimately wrote a letter on 15-10-1987 to Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax requesting that the proceedings may be dropped. As no favourable reply was received, the petitioner filed this petition on 24-10-1987. When notice of this petition was served for hearing of stay application on 4-11-1987 Mr. Shaikh Haider informed the Court that the assessment order had already been passed before service of the notice. The…
πŸ”’
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