Case Details

Citation(s)
2008 SLG 113 2008 SLD 113 2008 PTD 707 (2004) 90 TAX 105
Federal Tax Ombudsman
Complaint No.1106-K of 2003, decision dated: 3rd November, 2003
, JUSTICE (RETD.) SALEEM AKHTAR, FEDERAL TAX OMBUDSMAN
S.M. Sibtain, Advisor, Dealing Officer. Muhammad Raza Merchant for the Complainant. Chaman Lal Oad, IAC for
Respondent

Messrs SHAHEEN COURIER SERVICES, Proprietor Amir Ali Shroff, Karachi

VS

TAXATION OFFICER (I.A.C.) RANGEII/COMPANIES-I, KARACHI

Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

Section: 122

Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 1979

Section: 66A,59(1),66A,59(1),24(c),24(ff),24(fff) ,52,86,139

(a) Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001)----S. 122---Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979), S.66-A & 59(1)---C.B.R. Circular No.9 of 1998, dated 15-7-1998---C.B.R. Circular No.14 of 1998, dated 9-10-1998---Establishment of Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXXV of 2000), S.2(3)---Amendment of assessment---Self-assessment---Show-cause notice to make additional assessment by modifying or cancelling the assessment made under S.59(1) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 on the ground that return was wrongly accepted under Self-Assessment Scheme as tax liability in the return was calculated less than the required calculation of tax to qualify for Self-Assessment Scheme---Complainant/assessee contended that observation of Inspecting Additional Commissioner was misconceived and tax was miscalculated---Tax already paid was more than the tax payable to qualify under Self-Assessment Scheme---Validity---Inspecting Additional Commissioner had no valid reason to consider that tax payable on the basis of return filed was calculated at an amount less than actually payable---Commissioner of Income Tax and all concerned officers above him should have been concerned that Taxation Officers did not apply their mind to appreciate the. facts---Initiation of such proceedings put the credibility of the entire Revenue Division at stake---Inspecting Additional Commissioner, firstly, miscalculated the tax liability of the complainant/assessee on declared income and secondly he failed to appreciate that even if there- was an error of calculation the tax withheld during the income year was much more than even the higher tax liability incorrectly calculated by him---Reasons of such acts of the Inspecting Additional Commissioner could be either incompetence or wilful harassment---Maladministration committed in issuing notice under S.122/66A by incorrectly considering the assessment under S.59 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue was proved. (b) Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001)--- ----S.122---Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979), S.66-A, 59(1), 24(c), 24(ff), 24(fff), 52, 86 & 139---C.B.R. Circular No.9 of 1998, dated…
🔒
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