Case Details

Citation(s)
2002 SLG 410 2002 SLD 410 2002 PTD 2743
Lahore High Court
C.T.R. No.374 of 1991, decision dated: 21st December, 2000
NASEEM SIKANDAR AND, JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA, JJ
Muhammad Iqbal Hashim for Petitioner. Muhammad Ilyas Khan for
Respondent

MUHAMMAD RAFIQ

VS

COMMISSIONER OF IncomE tax, FAISALABAD ZONE, FAISALABAD

Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 1979

Section: 136

(a) Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)---S. 136(1)---Reference to High Court---High Court declined to answer the question that when Assessing Officer did not attempt service by post, was he legally competent to order service by affixture as such question was not a substantial question of law. Zaibtun Textile Mills Ltd. v. Central Board of Revenue and others PLD 1983 SC 358 eel. (b) Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)--- ----S. 136(1)---Reference to High Court----High Court declined to answer the question whether the Tribunal was justified in refusing to consider and adjudicate upon the issue of validity of service by fixture on the ground that it did not raise any substantial question of law. (c) Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)--- ----S. 136(1)---Reference to High Court---Tribunal refused to accept the plea that the findings qua lack of adequate opportunity had to. result in annulment instead of setting aside the assessments---High Court confirmed the finding of the Tribunal as no illegality was found in the findings---Remand of appeal by the Appellate Authority was in accordance with law on the given facts. ORDER NASEEM SIKANDAR, J.---This is a case stated by the Lahore Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, at the instance of the assessee; an individual, who at the relevant time engaged himself in purchases and sales of Deg, Pig-iron and Hardcoke. Following questions have been framed for our consideration and reply: (1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case when I.T.O. did not attempt service by post, was he legally competent to order service by affixture? (2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case was the ITAT justified in refusing to consider and adjudicate upon the issue of validity of service by affixture on the ground that it was immaterial? (3) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the assessment order under section 63 without proper, service of notice under sections 61 and 62 is to be set aside for de' novo, assessment, or to be annulled/cancelled. 2. In the two assessment years involved viz. 1983-84 and 1984-85, assessments were framed under section 59(1) of the- Income Tax…
🔒
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