Case Details

Citation(s)
2002 SLG 250 2002 SLD 250 2002 PTD 1560 (2003) 87 TAX 102
Lahore High Court
I.T.A- No. 188 of 1998, derided on 18-02-2000
NASEEM SIKANDAR AND MUHAMMAD SAIR ALI, JJ
Muhammad Ilyas Khan for Appellant

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/WEALTH TAX, LAHORE ZONEB, LAHORE

VS

Messrs NOOR TRADING COMPANY, PATTOKI

Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 1979

Section: 59,61.65&136(1)

(a) Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)---Ss. 59, 61. 65 & 136(1)---Central Board of Revenue Circular No.9, dated 1-7-1993, para. l(i)---Appeal----Self-Assessment Scheme ---Re­opening of case---Assessment under Self-Assessment Scheme was not accepted by the Income-tax Authorities and notice under S.61 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, was issued to the assessee---Contention of the assessee was that his return filed under the Self-Assessment Scheme was immune from scrutiny-.--Income-tax Authorities did not accept the contention of the assessee and selection of case for process under normal law was maintained---Income-tax Tribunal allowed appeal filed by the assessee---Validity---Claim of the assessee that he was entitled to the benefit of immunity clause by returning 15% increase in the tax was not questioned by the Authorities either before the Appellate Authority or before the Tribunal---Assessing Officer as well as the Appellate Authority avoided to record any finding on the claim of immunity as preferred by the assessee---High Court expressed its distress on the conduct-of the Revenue to first hold out a promise and then to attempt circumventing the same after the assessee had completed/fulfilled the requirements for enjoying the declared concession---Whether a return had qualified or had not qualified for acceptance under Self-Assessment Scheme, generally would not give rise to a question of law---Appeal was dismissed in limine. (b) Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)--- ----S.59---Self-Assessment Scheme---Object and scope---Immunity clause in any fiscal statute or a similar concession in the rules framed thereunder, is an expression of helplessness on the part of the Revenue to tap the pilferage---Once the helplessness is so declared in the form of an immunity clause under an Act or a rule then in all fairness the Revenue must accept the reality---Revenue should allow the benefit/concession wherever sought to be availed by a subject, on fulfillment of due requirements---Will be a very bad expression of frustration if the Revenue declaring a concession should attempt to circumvent the immunity clause in order to catch a fish which it had failed to lay…
🔒
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