Case Details

Citation(s)
1998 SLG 202 1998 SLD 202 1998 PTD 1393 (1998) 77 TAX 4
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue
I.T.A. No.391/KB of !995-96, decision dated: 23rd September, 1997, hearing DATE : 20-09-1997
AFTAB IQBAL RATHORE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Muhammad Javed Zakaria for Appellant. Amjad Malik, D.R. for
Respondent

Deprecated: preg_match(): Passing null to parameter #2 ($subject) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 411

Deprecated: htmlspecialchars(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 435

Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 1979

Section: 59

Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)----S.59---Self-Assessment Scheme (1992-93), para. 4---C.B.R. Circular No.16 of 1992, dated 1-7-1992, para. 4---Return under Self-Assessment Scheme (1992-93) was filed by assessee which qualified for acceptance under the said Scheme---No deficiency in the said return having been pointed out by the Department, its selection for total audit through random ballot was ab initio illegal. I.T.O. v. Chappal Builders 1993 PTD 1108 = (1979) 118 ITR 326 and C.I.T. v. Siemen A.G. 1991 PTD 488 ref. ORDER This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of the learned Appellate Additional Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) dated 19-12-1995. The appellant claims the case to be immune from total audit and, therefore, agitates its exclusion from Self-Assessment Scheme. Alternatively the appellant agitates the limited relief given by the learned A.A.C. in the estimate of income. 2. Mr. Javed Zakaria, Advocate, the learned authorized representative, submitted that the appellant/assessee a goldsmith had filed his return of income under the Self-Assessment Scheme. The return qualified for acceptance under the scheme. No deficiency in the return was pointed out by the income-tax officer. The case of the assessee for the assessment year 1992-93 was selected for total audit and the assessment order was framed under normal law. It was submitted that as per note to para. 4 of the Self Assessment Scheme (Circular No. 16 of 1992, dated 1st July, 1992) for the assessment year 1992-93 an assurance has been given that "a case once selected through computer ballot will not be earmarked for such ballot in the next two years". It was submitted that in view of this assurance the case of the appellant could not be selected for. total audit for the assessment year 1994-95. It was submitted that the learned A.A.C. instead of adjudicating on the above issue raised a new issue which has not been mentioned in the assessment order that the assessee had not declared and paid tax to the extent of 10 % more in the year under consideration which was required for qualifying under the Self-Assessment Scheme. The learned A.R. submitted that this…
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