2015 PLP (Trib (PTD)

CH. ANWAAR UL HAQ (JUDICIAL MEMBER).

The titled miscellaneous application has been preferred at the instance of taxpayer, seeking rectification of an order dated 7-4-2014, recorded in I.T.A. No.1405/LB/12, Tax Years 2008, passed by this Tribunal whereby appeal of the taxpayer was dismissed.

2. It is submitted by the learned AR that the appeal of the taxpayer was dismissed by this Tribunal while observing that "the learned AR only produced before me the ledger account of the parties from whom purchases claimed to be made to the tune of Rs.9,370,127 but he failed to provide even a single receipt of such purchase". It is contended by the learned AR that submission of purchase record was never the obstacle between the taxpayer and revenue. It is asserted by the learned AR that during the course of hearing before the Bench, the taxpayer was not asked to produce purchase receipts as the tax imposed by the DCIT was not due to non-production of subject purchase receipts but it was due to non-production of NTN/CNIC and addresses of the recipients parties from whom the subject purchases were made. The taxpayer contended that all the purchase record is available with the taxpayer and he produced the said record before me for perusal.

3. I have considered the submissions made by the learned AR and perused the purchases record produce before me. After careful perusal of such record, it reveals that these pertains to hundreds of purchase receipts which were claimed to be made from different suppliers by the taxpayer. Minutely seeing all these receipts it transpired that all these receipts were prepared on blank papers in one person's handwriting almost with same ink whereas these receipts pertains to so many suppliers for the gross amount of Rs.9,370,127 and individually below Rs.25,000 each. It seems that all these vouchers were made out/ prepared by the taxpayer just to present at this forum at this belated stage to defraud the Bench to avoid taxation which is intolerable. One officer of the applicant/company who was in possession of record appeared before me along with learned AR was required to place on record these purchase invoices. He stated that these are original receipts and copies of the same will be provided, but he failed to turn back.

4. Scope of rectification is very limited and such power can only be exercised in case of glaring mistakes floating on the surface of the record and can be seen without further investigation or further probe into the matter by way of entertaining new set of arguments or evidence brought on record which was not earlier furnished before the Bench while passing earlier order against which rectification is moved. A conscious decision was delivered by the Bench while dismissing the appeal of the taxpayer. Therefore, I hold that the impugned order of the Tribunal is not open to any rectification as no "error" therein has been conclusively established by the applicant.

5. Since, the applicant has approached this Tribunal with unclean hands and also wasted valuable public time of this Tribunal and unduly burdened its resources, this application is, therefore, dismissed with compensatory cost of Rs.5000 payable to dispensary A/c of the Lahore Tax Bar Association. HBT/22/Tax(Trib.) Application dismissed.