2005 PLP 2424 (PTD)
Sh. KHALID IQBAL Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/ WEALTH TAX and 2 others
| Citation | 2005 PLP 2424 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Sair Ali and Sh. Azmat Saeed, JJ |
| Parties | Sh. KHALID IQBAL Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/ WEALTH TAX and 2 others |
| Primary Law | Wealth Tax Act (XV of 1963) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 2424 (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Wealth Tax Act (XV of 1963) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2005 PLP 2424 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Sair Ali and Sh. Azmat Saeed, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 2424 (PTD) (Sh. KHALID IQBAL Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/ WEALTH TAX and 2 others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Syed Nasir Ghani for Appellant.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 18, 17 & 27
Imposition of penalty under S. 18, Wealth Tax Act, 1963
Special fact noted in the case by the Tribunal was that as against total wealth tax demand of Rs. 1,24,281 for all the years together penalty of Rs.291,245 had been imposed
Tribunal, therefore, observed that it was in the fairness of things to restrict the penalty to the tax demand each year
Discretion vested in the Tribunal had been exercised in favour of the assessee based on facts and circumstances of the case
No question of law had arisen from the impugned order of the Tribunal nor any such question of law had been identified in the grounds of appeal or, urged at the bar
Appeal being without any merit was dismissed-by the High Court.
Judgment & Decree
This appeal under section 27 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1963 filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ITAT whereby penalty imposed under section 18 of the Wealth Tax was partially reduced.
2. Brief facts leading to the filing of this appeal are that the appellant-assessee failed to file Wealth Tax Returns for the year under consideration. Notice under section 17 of the Act ibid was issued. In compliance whereof Wealth Tax Returns were submitted whereupon the assessment proceedings were completed and the Assessing Officer also imposed a penalty under section 18(2) of the Act ibid. The appellant assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(Appeals), who was pleased to maintain the order of the Assessing Authority. The appellant-assessee invoked the jurisdiction of the ITAT, 'which partly accepted the appeal and reduced the penalty to the tax demand for the year in question.
3. The grievance raised through this petition is that the quantum of penalty is still too high and is liable to be reduced.
4. That the appeal filed by the appellant-assessee before the ITAT caine up for hearing along with other connected appeals which were disposed of with the following observations:-- "We have considered the arguments of the learned .representatives and noted the special fact that as against total wealth tax demand of Rs.1,24,281 for all the years together, penalty of Rs.291,425 has been imposed. We deem it in the fairness of things to restrict the penalty to the tax demand each year.
5. It is clear and obvious that discretion vested in the ITAT has been exercised that too in favour of the appellant-assessee based on the .facts and circumstances of the case. No question of law arises from the impugned order of the ITAT nor any such question of law has been identified in the grounds of appeal or urged at the bar. In this view of the matter, this appeal is without any merit and is hereby dismissed. M.B.A./K-123/L Appeal dismissed.