1997 PLP (Trib (PTD)
N/A
| Citation | 1997 PLP (Trib (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Ashfaq Ahmad, Accountant Member |
| Parties | N/A |
| Primary Law | Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1997 PLP (Trib (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1997 PLP (Trib (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Pakistan bench comprising: Ashfaq Ahmad, Accountant Member.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1997 PLP (Trib (PTD) (N/A). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nemo for Appellant.
- Mian Munawar Ghafoor, D.R. for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 22nd January, 1997.
Headnotes / Summary
S.22
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1981, R.20(2)
Income from factory
Case selected for total audit and assessed
Such assessment confirmed in appeal
Grievance of assessee before Tribunal was that assessment was not made in line with parallel cases
No one appearing for assessing side before Tribunal to cite any parallel case where lesser rate was applied
No substance was found in appeal as assessment was rightly made on basis of parallel case cited in the appellate order.
Judgment & Decree
Mian Munawar Ghafoor, D.R. for Respondent. Date of hearing: 22nd January, 1997. This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A) for the assessment year 1987-88. The appellant has agitated that the assessing officer may be directed to assess the income in line with other parallel cases.
2. None was present for the Appellant. The appeal is, therefore, taken up for disposal by resort to Rule 20(2) of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1981.
3. The appellant derives income from ice factory. The appellant declared income at Rs.55,
000. The case was selected for total audit. After discussing the facts of the case the assessing officer finalised the income at Rs.228,
000. The learned CIT(A) maintained the order of the assessing officer in view of a parallel case existing at NTN 04-30-0811547. None is present to cite a parallel case in which lower rate has been applied. The appeal, is therefore, dismissed being devoid of force. C.M.S./384/Trib. Appeal dismissed.