Case Details

Citation(s)
2002 SLG 91 2002 SLD 91 2002 PTD 560 (2002) 85 TAX 82
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
I.T.A. No. 1211/KB of 1995-96, decision dated: 15-11-2001
, JAVED IQBAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ANDMUHAMMAD AKHTAR NAZAR MIAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Abdul Waheed, I.T.P. for Appellant. Muhammad Umar Farooq, 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: 63,SecondSched

Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)---S. 63 & Second Sched., Part I, Cl. 54-A(b)---Best assessment---Salary income---Lump sum addition---Validity---Authorities below were bent upon making some additions .only because the orders were being made ex parte---Validity---Whenever the Assessing Officer proceeded ex parte, the onus shifted on him to justify his estimates of income against the declared income and mere an ex parte order was no justification for making ad hoc additions---Assessing Officer was directed by the Tribunal to delete the lump sum addition and also to allow the exemption available to the assessee as per Cl. 54-A of Part I of Second Sched. of Income Tax Ordinance, 1979. ORDER MUHAMMAD AKHTAR NAZAR MIAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER).---The appellant in this case is a salaried person and is aggrieved against the order of the CIT(A), dated 22-1-1995 whereunder he confirmed the assessment made by the DCIT at total income of Rs.304,016 against declared income of Rs.94,560. 2. Both the learned representatives have been heard and the orders of the authorities below perused. 3. The facts so far as relevant to this appeal are that the case of the appellant is said to have been selected for audit through Random Ballot but in spite of service of statutory notices none had attended to pursue the matter before the DCIT. The DCIT made the assessment as under:--- Income declared Rs. 94,560 Add: Utilities claimed at Rs.9,456 for lack of evidences. Rs. 9,456 Addition as discussed above. Rs. 200,000 Total Income:-- Rs.304,016 4. The lump sum addition was made by the DCIT with the following observations:-- . "This show-cause notice was also not complied with, therefore, ex parte assessment is finalized keeping in view the history of the` case. Since the assessee has a history of ex parte assessments, therefore, lump sum addition of Rs.200,000 is made to the income of the income of assessee." 5. The CIT(A)…
🔒
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