| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2004 SLG 2 2004 SLD 2 2004 PTCL 596 2005 PTD 344 (2005) 91 TAX 128 |
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue
I.T.As. Nos. 1730/KB to 1733/KB of 2001, decision dated: 1stJanuary, 2004, hearing DATE : 1st November, 2003
JAWAID MASOOD TAHIR BHATTI AND RASHEED AHMED SHEIKH, JUDICIAL MEMBERS AND AGHA KAFEEL BARIK, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
M. Jawed Zakaria for Appellant. Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Legal Advisor, Javed Iqbal Rana, D.R. and Ali Hasnain, D.R. for
Respondent
I.T.As. Nos. 1730/KB to 1733/KB of 2001, decision dated: 1stJanuary, 2004, hearing DATE : 1st November, 2003
JAWAID MASOOD TAHIR BHATTI AND RASHEED AHMED SHEIKH, JUDICIAL MEMBERS AND AGHA KAFEEL BARIK, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
M. Jawed Zakaria for Appellant. Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Legal Advisor, Javed Iqbal Rana, D.R. and Ali Hasnain, D.R. for
Respondent
Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 1979
Section: 66,66A,20,23,27,28,SecondSched,Cl-116
(a) Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)-----S.66-A---Powers of Inspecting Assistant Commissioner to revise Income Tax Officer's order---Scope and extent---Powers of Inspecting Assistant Commissioner are quasi judicial hedged with limitation and has to be exercised subject to the same and within its scope and ambit---Inspecting Assistant Commissioner's powers to modify/cancel or set aside the already completed assessment are circumscribed around himself and not on the basis of any information and material supplied or directions given by some other authority otherwise the sanctity accorded to the already completed assessment would smash --- Principles. Bare reading of section 66-A; Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 clearly spells out that the powers of the IAC to invoke the provisions of this section are wholly, solely and exclusively dependent upon consideration by himself which must be based on objective basis. Criterion of reasonableness to invoke the provisions of section 66-A is not subjective but objective. Administrative decision in exercise of powers even if conferred in subjective term are to be made in good faith on relevant considerations and must be based on reasonable material evidence. The order which is sought to be revised must be erroneous, also by virtue of its being erroneous and prejudice must have been caused to the interest of Revenue. In no way section 66-A empowers the IAC to substitute his own for that of the assessing officer unless the decision is held to be erroneous. Error and prejudice must manifest in the show-cause notice to be issued under section 66-A and not to establish by conducting fishing and roving enquiries subsequently. Findings of the IAC should not be merely charge-sheet of the Assessing Officer showing his incompetency and inefficiency and ought not to be in the nature of further enquiry.The IAC cannot travel beyond and the record of the proceedings in which the order has been made. The expression "record" as has been used in section 66-A denotes record of proceedings of that particular year and not the record related to the subsequent year or any other year. If any event/material/information/report/proceeding comes intoβ¦