1989 PLP 843 (PTD)

Through this Constitutional petition M/s. Friends Construction Company, Bahawalpur petitioner wants this Court to declare the decision of Income Tax Officer, Circle No.29, Bahawalpur, respondent No.2, which was subsequently approved by the Commissioner of Income Tax Multan Zone, Multan, respondent No. 1, in taking out the case of the petitioner from immunity law of self assessment to the normal law of assessment by the department, to be illegal and without lawful authority.

2. The facts leading to this petition, briefly, are that the petitioner firm ha filed its return of income for the assessment year 1987-88 at an income of Rs.84,641.17 under immunity in accord with the self-assessment scheme under section 59 of Income Tax Ordinance, 1979. On 22-12-1987, the Income Tax Officer Circle 29, Bahawalpur, respondent No.2 vide notice required the petitioner-firm to submit short documents within 30 days. It was made clear in the notice that non-production of short documents within given time will lead the case of the petitioner excluded from the purview of self-assessmeut scheme automatically. This notice was served on the counsel of the petitioner-firm who had filed return of income for the assessment year 1987-88, Since short documents were not supplied by the petitioner-firm within one month of the service of the notice, therefore, the case was taken out from immunity law of self-assessment and was set apart for normal hearing under para.l (f) of Circular No.9 of 1987 dated 26-i1-1987 issued by the Central Board of Revenue. The petitioner submitted application to the Commissioner of Income-tax Multan Zone, Multan, respondent No.l praying that his case be assessed in accordance with self-assessment scheme. The request was refused on 30-6-1988 hence this petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no notice for the supply of the short documents was served on the petitioner-firm; that the service of notice upon the counsel for the petitioner-firm was not proper service of the notice; that although the notice was not served on the petitioner-firm properly yet it had submitted the required certificate issued by the Public Health Engineering Department in the Office of I.T.O. Circle-27 on 28-2-1988 and that, in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Officer, 13ahawalpur, respondent No.2, had no authority to take out the case of the petitioner-firm from immunity law of self-assessment.

4. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel with care. I have not been able to persuade myself to agree with him. I find that the notice dated 22-12-1987 issued by Income-tax Officer Circle-29, Bahawalpur for the supply of short documents was physically served on the counsel of the petitioner-firm, who had filed return of income for the assessment year 1987-88; that the petitioner-firm in the power of attorney executed by it had authorised its counsel to do such other acts as may be necessary in regard to the income-tax proceedings; that the service upon the counsel is service of his client in the eye of law; that in notice dated 22-12-1987, it was made clear to the petitioner-firm that non-production of short documents within 30 days will lead his case excluded from the purview of self-assessment scheme automatically; that, the short documents were not supplied to Income-tax Officer, Circle-29, Bahawalpur, within 30 days and as such no exception can be taken to the decision of respondent No.l for taking out the case of the petitioner-firm from immunity law of self-assessment to the normal law of assessment by the department. Learned counsel has not been able to point out any illegality or jurisdictional defect in the impugned orders. The respondents have not flouted the provisions of relevant law. For what has been said above, I do not see any justification to interfere with the, decision of the respondents, in exercise of the Constitutional jurisdiction of this Court. The petition is, therefore, dismissed in limine. M.B.A./F-125/L Petition dismissed.