Case Details

Citation(s)
2002 SLG 102 2002 SLD 102 2002 PTD 700
Sindh High Court
Constitutional Petition No.438 of 1989, decision dated: 21st November, 2001
ZAHID KURBAN ALAVI AND MUHAMMAD MUJEEBULLAH SIDDIQUI, JJ
Muhammad Ali Sayeed for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents

Syed AZHAR ALI

VS

Director General, EXCISE AND TAXATION and others

Law: Capital Gains Tax Rules, 1964

Section: 3,4,5,6,7,8,9,15,16

(a) Capital Gains Tax Rules, 1964--- ----Rr. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 & 9---West Pakistan Finance Act (IX of 1963), S.M(1)(2)---West Pakistan Immovable Property Tax Act (V of 1958), S.3---Sale, exchange or transfer of immovable property---Capital gains tax, determination of---Procedure elaborated. (b) Capital. Gains Tax Rules, 1964---Rr. 7 & 8---West Pakistan Finance Act (IX of 1963), S.16(2)(b)--­West Pakistan Immovable Property Tax Act (V of 1958, S.3---Fair market value of immovable property,. determination of---Factors to be considered by Assessing Officer; value of consideration of sales or transfers of similarly situated and similarly used urban immovable properties; price paid for adjacent lands possessing similar advantages; price paid within a reasonable time for the property; rates and profits of ,property received shortly before:' the sale and opinion of valuer or 'experts---Price at which one property may have been-sold would not be sufficient, but a number of sales and transfers must be- taken into consideration for such purpose. (c) Capital Gains Tax Rules, 1964--- ----Rr. 7, 8, 9, 15 & 16---West Pakistan Finance Act (IX of 1963), S 16(2)(b)---West Pakistan Immovable Property Tax Act (V of 1958), S.3 ---Constitution of Pakistan (1973). Art-199 ---Constitutional petition--­Capital gains tax, determination of---Assessing Officer assessed the property at the rate higher than declared by petitioner in his return without taking into consideration sales of similarly situated properties possessing similar advantages---Appeal and revision filed against assessment order were dismissed ---Validity----Assessing Authority had made assessment order without application of mind and without assigning any specific reason by use of generalized statement and stock purchases by merely filling in the blanks of stereotyped printed form---Court deprecated such method in quasi-judicial proceedings and Particularly in matters pertaining to creation of fiscal liability---Revisional and Appel­late Authority had neither considered contentions raised by petitioner nor had realized that Assessing Authority had fixed the valuation of property sold by petitioner without any…
🔒
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