Case Details

Citation(s)
2000 SLG 8 2000 SLD 8 2000 PTD 1438
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue
I.T.A. No. 2170/KB of 1998-99, decision dated: 18-12-1999, hearing DATE : 18-12-1999
SHAHID, JAMAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SYED KABIRUL HASAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
A. S. Jafari for Appellant. Muhammad Saeed, 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: 66,66A,66A(1)(aa)

Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)---S.66-A(l)(aa)---Powers of Inspecting Additional Commissioner to revise Deputy Commissioner's order ---Assessee was confronted under S.66-A of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 with a figure invested by him shown in the ledger account---Assessment was completed and issue was finally decided by the Appellate Tribunal---Notice under S.66-A was again issued on the basis of same material but with different figures and Assessing Officer was directed to reframe the assessment after investigating the source of investment over and above the amount sub judice before the Appellate Tribunal---Validity---Figures with which assessee was confronted in fresh notice were different---Different figures, extracted from the same ledger account, by the Assessing Officer or Inspecting Additional Commissioner, would not constitute a "new point" on which Inspecting Additional Commissioner-could have exercised jurisdiction under. S.66-A, Income Tax Ordinance, 1979---If Assessing. Officer or. Revising Officer had failed to properly examine the ledger accounts and extract the correct figures from those accounts, it was their own fault and not of the assessee for which a fresh notice or fresh jurisdiction could be assumed time and again--­inspecting Additional Commissioner, thus, misdirected himself and had gone far beyond his jurisdiction-, --Assessment completed in pursuance to the direction of Inspecting Additional Commissioner was declared to be illegal by Appellate Tribunal. 1992 PTD (Trib) 1187 ref. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: SHAHID JAMAL (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER).---This appeal, filed at the instance of the appellant, is directed against I.A.C.'s order. Under section 66-A, dated-2-4-1999. 2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are as under. The appellant is an individual and proprietor of a distribution agency known as Asra Enterprises. The appellant, hereinafter, referred to as assessee, is distributor of M/s. Lakson Tobacco Co. Ltd. and Premier Tobacco Industries Ltd. He declared his return for the first time as new taxpayer, for an income year of three months ended 30-6-1994, declaring income of Rs.29,500. The return was supported by Certificates from…
🔒
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