Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 1979

Section: 13,13(1)(d)

Law: Income Tax Act, 1922

Section: 4(2D)

Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)---S.13(1)(d)---Income-tax Act (XI of 1922), S.4(2D)---Addition---Value of property---Approval of I.A.C.---Two separate and independent approvals- of the Inspecting Additional Commissioner are required for making additions to the declared income while resorting to the provisions of S.13 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979. C.I.T. v. Dr. Mrs. S.P. Niazi, Professor, Fatima Jinnah Medical College, Lahore C.T.R. No.324 of 1991 and Commissioner of Income-tax v. Muhammad Kasim 2000 PTD 280 rel. ORDER Through this application under section 136(2) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, the Commissioner of Income-tax, Companies, Lahore has proposed following common questions of law which are said to have arisen out of an order of the Lahore Bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, dated 11-2-1990:-- "(1) In the facts and circumstances of the case was the Hon'ble I.T.A.T. justified in cancelling the addition when the assessee was confronted with value of Rs.27,50,000. (2) In the facts and circumstances of the case, has the I.T.A.T. not erred in not fixing the value of Rs.27,50,000. (3) Was the Hon'ble I.T.A.T. justified in holding that the approval under section 13 was not obtained when the complete assessment was passed with the approval of the I.A.C.? (4) Has the learned I.T.A.T. erred in holding that the I.T.O. had no definite information about rates of land when the I.T.O. relied on auction rates after giving due weightage for time factor and other factors? 2. According to the statement .of the State, the assessee is an individual who returned income from property and salary for the assessment year 1986-87 at Rs.74,478. On selection of his case for total audit the Assessing Officer by way of the order, dated 28-6-1987 proceeded to make an addition of Rs.6,75,000 under section 13(1)(d) of the Ordinance, 1979. Earlier it was found that the assessee had understated his 1/4th share in a commercial property whose value was adopted by the Assessing Officer at Rs.35,00,000. The, difference between the declared and adopted value, as said above, was added towards the income which was computed at Rs.7,49,471. The remand order passed by the First…

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