2005 PLP (Trib (PTD)
N/A
| Citation | 2005 PLP (Trib (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Jawaid Masood Tahir Bhatti, Judicial Member |
| Parties | N/A |
| Primary Law | Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 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 2005 PLP (Trib (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Pakistan bench comprising: Jawaid Masood Tahir Bhatti, Judicial Member.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP (Trib (PTD) (N/A). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Arif Latif for Appellant.
- Anwar Ali Shah, D.R. for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 25th January, 2005.
- 2. Mr. Arif Latif Advocate has appeared on behalf of the appellant and contended that Assessing Officer is not right in saying that none attended on behalf of the assessee on 22-2-2003 as counsel for the appellant attended the office of the Assessing Officer but the proceedings could not take place due to non-availability of file. Later on he came to know that on the same date i.e. 22-2-2003, the assessment order has been passed by the Assessing Officer. He has placed before me the notice under section 62 of the Repealed Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 sent by the Taxation Officer on 22-2-2003 directing to appear on or before 28-2-2003 failing which ex parte decision under section 63 will be taken but the assessment has been finalized on 22-2-2003. He has in this respect also pointed out that Taxation Officer on the assessment order as well as on the IT-30, the date of assessment has mentioned as 22-2-2003. Learned counsel for the appellant has also placed before me the letter, dated 26-10-2004 sent by him to the Taxation Officer requesting for issuance of revised IT-30 in light of appeal effects given by CIT. Learned counsel has contended that learned CIT(A) has also not considered these facts and has without any justification upheld the treatment regarding profit and loss account and application of G.P. He has submitted that although the estimated sales has been reduced but the learned CIT(A) has not considered that assessment has been made without any justification and affording proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee, therefore, the declared version is directed to be accepted.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 62
Assessment on production of accounts, evidence etc.
Finalization of assessment on the same date on which the notice under section 62 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 was issued
Assessing Officer, after issuing a notice under S.62 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 on 22-2-2003 directing the assessee to appear on or before 28-2-2003 had finalized the assessment on the same date i.e. 22-2-2003 which was without any basis and nullity in the eye of law
Appellate Tribunal vacated the order of First Appellate Authority as well as the assessment order and directed that version of the assessee be accepted.
Judgment & Decree
The appellant through this appeal has objected to the impugned order of the learned CIT(A), dated 15-7-2004 on the grounds as set forth in the memo. of appeal.
2. Mr. Arif Latif Advocate has appeared on behalf of the appellant and contended that Assessing Officer is not right in saying that none attended on behalf of the assessee on 22-2-2003 as counsel for the appellant attended the office of the Assessing Officer but the proceedings could not take place due to non-availability of file. Later on he came to know that on the same date i.e. 22-2-2003, the assessment order has been passed by the Assessing Officer. He has placed before me the notice under section 62 of the Repealed Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 sent by the Taxation Officer on 22-2-2003 directing to appear on or before 28-2-2003 failing which ex parte decision under section 63 will be taken but the assessment has been finalized on 22-2-2003. He has in this respect also pointed out that Taxation Officer on the assessment order as well as on the IT-30, the date of assessment has mentioned as 22-2-2003. Learned counsel for the appellant has also placed before me the letter, dated 26-10-2004 sent by him to the Taxation Officer requesting for issuance of revised IT-30 in light of appeal effects given by CIT. Learned counsel has contended that learned CIT(A) has also not considered these facts and has without any justification upheld the treatment regarding profit and loss account and application of G.P. He has submitted that although the estimated sales has been reduced but the learned CIT(A) has not considered that assessment has been made without any justification and affording proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee, therefore, the declared version is directed to be accepted.
3. On the other hand, learned DR is supporting the impugned orders of the officers below. He has contended that learned CIT(A) has already allowed the relief while reducing the sales and there is no justification for further relief.
4. I have heard the learned representatives of both the sides and have also pursued the impugned order of the learned CIT(A), the assessment order and the documents placed before me by the learned counsel for the assessee.
5. I have found that Taxation Officer after issuing a notice under section 62 on 22-2-2003 directing the assessee to appear on or before 28-2-2003 has finalized the assessment on the same date i.e. 22-2-2003 which is without any basis and nullity in the eye of law. I, therefore, vacate the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) as well as the assessment order and the declared version of the assessee is directed to be accepted. The appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. C.M.A./369/Tax (Trib.) Appeal accepted.