Case Details

Citation(s)
2002 SLG 517 2002 SLD 517 2002 PTD 2143 (2002) 86 TAX 167
Federal Tax Ombudsman
Review Application No. 29-K in Complaint No. 849-K of 2001, decision dated: 24-11-2001
, JUSTICE (RETD.) SALEEM AKHTAR, FEDERAL TAX OMBUDSMAN
Nizam-ud-Din, ITP for the Complainant. Ahmed Saeed, IAC, Range-III, Zone C. Hamid Saeed Khan, Special Officer for the Department

RAO & COMPANY, KARACHI

VS

SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD

Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 1979

Section: 62,65,13(1)(dd)

Law: Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance, 2000

Section: 14(8),9

(a) Establishment of Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXXV of 2000)--- ---Ss. 14(8) & 9---Complaint to Federal Tax Ombudsman ---Review--­Recall of order-- -Service of notice after expiry of date of hearing--­Review application was allowed and the order passed in the absence of complainant was recalled on the ground that notice was served much after the expiry of the date of hearing as was evident from the various postal stamps on the envelope. (b) Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)---Ss. 62, 65 & 13(1)(dd)---Income Tax Rules, 1982, R.207-A---C.B. R. Circular No.3 of 1967, dated April, 1967---Establishment of Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXXV of 2000), Ss. 9 & 2(3)--­Stamp Act (II of 1899), S. 27A---Additional-assessment---Definite infor­mation ---Stamp duty valuation---Collector's valuation table---Value of property was assessed on which stamp duty was paid and accepted by the Registrar---Copies of sale agreement and transfer sales were filed at the time of assessment---Proceedings under S.65 of the Income Tax Ordinance were initiated on the ground that the department was in possession of definite information that the value of the plot declared was understated as the minimum value determined under R. 207A of Income Tax Rules, 1982 read with S.13(2) & (3) of Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 on the basis of Collector's Rate was higher than the declared value--­Validity---At the time of making assessment in the presence of existing Rules it was open for the Assessing Officer to have evaluated the property on the basis of Collector's value instead of stamp duty valuation---Assessing Officer had made conscious decision by accepting the stamp duty value---Registrar, in case of doubt about the price of property, could make reference to the Collector to determine the value upon which stamp duty was to be paid but he failed to do so---Neither any definite information was with the Department nor misdeclaration was noticed and it was merely a change of opinion---Assessing Officer in wealth tax assessment had valued at the Collector's valuation much after the assessment had been framed by the Income-tax Officer---Subsequent order by 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