2010 PLP (Trib (PTD)
N/A
| Citation | 2010 PLP (Trib (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Inland Revenue Appellate Tribunal of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Jawaid Masood Tahir Bhatti, Judicial Member and Shahnaz Rafique, Accountant Member |
| Parties | N/A |
| Primary Law | Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2010 PLP (Trib (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2010 PLP (Trib (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Inland Revenue Appellate Tribunal of Pakistan bench comprising: Jawaid Masood Tahir Bhatti, Judicial Member and Shahnaz Rafique, Accountant Member.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2010 PLP (Trib (PTD) (N/A). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Shahid-ul-Hassan, D.R. for Appellant.
- Shoaib Ahmed Sheikh for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
S.170(4)
First Appellate Authority directed the Taxation Officer to issue refund voucher as the Taxation Officer had not issued the same in accordance with law
Order of First Appellate Authority was upheld and not interfered with by the Appellate Tribunal
Appeal filed by the Department was dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
The Department through this appeal has objected to the impugned order of learned CIT(Appeals), dated 24-12-2008 on the following grounds: "That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals-II), RTO, Lahore was not justified to direct the Taxation Officer to issue refund voucher" We have heard the learned representatives from both the sides and have also perused the above referred order of the learned CIT(A) and the order passed by the Taxation Officer under section 170(4) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001. We have found that the learned CIT(A) has directed the Taxation Officer to issue refund voucher for the year under review as the Taxation Officer has not issued the same in accordance with the law. The learned CIT(A) referred the decision of higher courts report as PLD 1969 Kar. 68 and the decision of this Tribunal, dated 8-8-2008 in I.T.A. No.576/LB of 2008 Tax year, 2003), I.T.A. No.577/LB/08 (Tax year, 2004) and I.T.A. No.578/LB of 2008 (Tax year 2005). In view of these facts and the legal position, we find no warrant for interference in the impugned order of the learned CIT(Appeals), which is upheld and the appeal filed by the department is dismissed. C.M.A./121/Tax(Trib.) Appeal dismissed.