2005 PLP 707 (PTD)
ABDUL RAHEEM Versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD
| Citation | 2005 PLP 707 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Federal Tax Ombudsman |
| Bench Members | Justice (Recd.) Saleem Akhtar, Federal Tax Ombudsman |
| Parties | ABDUL RAHEEM Versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD |
| Primary Law | Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 707 (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 2005 PLP 707 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Federal Tax Ombudsman bench comprising: Justice (Recd.) Saleem Akhtar, Federal Tax Ombudsman.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 707 (PTD) (ABDUL RAHEEM Versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Altaf Mohammad Khan, D.C.I.T. for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑Ss. 63 & 19‑‑‑Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001), S. 122‑A‑‑ Establishment of Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXXV of 2000), S. 2(3)‑‑‑Best judgment assessment‑‑‑Assessment was made in respect of property on which no rent was earned by the complainant/ assessee during his stay out of country for treatment of his fractured legs and was treated as non‑resident‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Assessments had already been set aside under S. 122‑A of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001‑‑ Assessing Officer had been dismissed from service on the charges of inefficiency and misconduct‑‑‑Notice under 5.122‑A of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 was initiated when the complaint was filed in the Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman‑‑‑Federal Tax Ombudsman recommended that the proceedings under S.122‑A, Income Tax Ordinance, 2000 be completed within 30 days since all the relevant documents have already been provided by the complainant. S. Amer Ahmad for the Complainant. Shahida Taj, Director Dealing Officer.
Judgment & Decree
2. It is alleged that he has been, treated as non‑resident and without hearing anything from the tax department his assessments were finalized after creating income‑tax demand as under:‑‑ Assessment Year Tax Levied 1. 1994.95 Rs.47,426 2. 1995‑
96. Rs.28,938 3. 1996‑97 Rs.26,224 4. 1997‑98 Rs.23,511 5. 1998‑99 Rs.24,853
3. It is stated that no rent was earned by him during the income year relevant to the assessment years, 1994‑95, 1995‑96 and 1996‑97 except his pension. For the year, 1997‑98, his income was below taxable limits. It is therefore, pleaded that the taxation officer may be directed to pass correct assessments orders framed in his case are arbitrary and without holding in to the facts of the case.
4. The department in its reply stated that the assessments for the years, 1994‑95 to 1998‑99 have already been set aside under section 122‑A of the Income Tax Ordinance, dated 22‑11‑2003 by the concerned Commissioner of the Income Tax. It is pointed out that the officer who had completed the assessments has already been dismissed from service on the charges of inefficiency misconduct. The respondents on the date of heating also produced the copy of order under sec tion 122‑A of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001. The AR on behalf of the complainants also acknowledged the efforts of the department. However, it appears from the record that notice under section 122‑A was initiated when the complaint was filed in the Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman.
5. In view of the above it is recommended that:‑‑ . (i) The proceedings under section 122‑A be completed within 30 days since all the relevant documents have already been ' provided by the complainant. (ii) Compliance report be submitted within 15 days after the service of assessment orders. C.M.A./103/FTO Order accordingly.