1997 PLP (Trib (PTD)
N/A
| Citation | 1997 PLP (Trib (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Abdul Rashid Qureshi, Judicial Member and Ashfaq Ahmad, Accountant Member |
| Parties | N/A |
| Primary Law | (d) Wealth Tax Act (XV of 1963), (a) Wealth Tax Act (XV of 1963), (b) Wealth Tax Act (XV of 1963) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1997 PLP (Trib (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: (d) Wealth Tax Act (XV of 1963), (a) Wealth Tax Act (XV of 1963), (b) Wealth Tax Act (XV of 1963), (c) Wealth Tax Rules, 1963 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: Abdul Rashid Qureshi, Judicial Member and 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
- Mrs. Talat Altaf Khan, D.R. for Appellant (in W.T.As Nos.909/LB to 912/LB of 1991-92 and 1451LB of 1992-93).
- Masood Ishaq for Respondent (in W.T.As. Nos.909/LB to 912/LB of 1991-92 and 145/LB of 1992-93).
- Masood Ishaq for Appellant (in W.T.As. Nos.141/LB of 1991-92 and 403/LB of 1993).
- Mrs. Talat Altaf Khan, D.R. for Respondent (in W.T.As Nos. 141/LB of 1991-92 and 403/LB of 1993).
- Date of hearing: 7th March, 1996.
Headnotes / Summary
S.7
Wealth Tax Rules, 1963, R.8
Valuation of asset
Jewellery-- Khot allowance
No Khot allowance was allowed while determining value of jewellery
Ten per cent. Khot allowance allowed by First Appellate Authority was upheld by the Tribunal.
S.7
Wealth Tax Rules, 1963, R.8(3)
Valuation of asset
Assessee declared value of plot
Assessing Officer assessed at higher value
First Appellate Authority reduced assessed value
Department contested and presented parallel case
Assessee stated that he had not been confronted with case relied upon
Assessee cited order by Tribunal whereby Tribunal in earlier years, upheld rates adopted by First Appellate Authority
Held, taking facts into consideration rates adopted by First Appellate Authority were in accordance with finding of Tribunal in its order for earlier years-- No interference was called for.
Rr.8(2)(c)(ii) & 9
Break-up value of shares
Assessee contested provision of taxation while determining break-up value of shares as per rules and department conceded that point
Held, action of Appellate Authority called for no interference
Appeal dismissed as incompetent.
S.7
Wealth Tax Rules, 1963, R.3
Escalation of prices
Appellant contended that price of land had not progressively increased
Held: Value of land all over Pakistan had escalated considerably
Finding of C.W.T. (A), in circumstances, upheld. R. T. As. Nos. 174 to 178/LB of 1987-88 ref.
Judgment & Decree
Mrs. Talat Altaf Khan, D.R. for Appellant (in W.T.As Nos.909/LB to 912/LB of 1991-92 and 1451LB of 1992-93). Masood Ishaq for Respondent (in W.T.As. Nos.909/LB to 912/LB of 1991-92 and 145/LB of 1992-93). Masood Ishaq for Appellant (in W.T.As. Nos.141/LB of 1991-92 and 403/LB of 1993). Mrs. Talat Altaf Khan, D.R. for Respondent (in W.T.As Nos. 141/LB of 1991-92 and 403/LB of 1993). Date of hearing: 7th March, 1996. ASHFAQ AHMAD (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER).
There are seven appeals in all pertaining to the assessment years 1987-88 to 1992-93. The department is in appeal against the orders of the First Appellate Authority for the assessment years 1987-88 to 1991-92 whereas the appellant has come up in appeal for the years 1991-92 and 1992-93. For the year 1987-88 the department is aggrieved on account of Khot allowance being allowance at 10 %. For the assessment years 1988-89 to 1991-92 the department is aggrieved on account of reduction in the value of land situated at Maqbool Road, Faisalabad. For the assessment year 1991-92 the department is also aggrieved on account of execution of provision of taxation while determining the B.U.V. of shares as per Rule 8(2) (ii) and Rule 8(9) of Wealth Tax Rules, 1963. The appellant for the years 1991-92 and 1992-93 is aggrieved on account of valuation of land at Maqbool Road, Faisalabad.
2. The brief facts of the case are that for the assessment year 1987-88 the assessee's jewellery was assessed @ Rs.3,400 per Tola against which no Khot allowance was allowed. The assessee being aggrieved preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A).who allowed 10% Khot. The learned D.R. did not contest the findings of the A.A.C. His action is accordingly upheld.
3. For the assessment years 1988-89 to 1991-92 the appellant declared a plot at Maqbool Road, Faisalabad. The W.T.O. assessed the value of plot at Rs.30,000, Rs.35,000, Rs,40,000 and Rs.44,000 per marla. The A.A.C. reduced the value of this plot to Rs.12,000, Rs.15,500, Rs.15,000 and Rs.16,000 per marla respectively for the years 1988-89 to 1991-92. The learned D.R. contested the reduction allowed by the A.A.C. on the ground that in the case existing at GIR No. 1679. The A.A.C. upheld the rate of Rs.30,000 per marla for the assessment year 1989-90. The learned A.R. on the other hand, stated that during the assessment proceedings he was never confronted with the plot of land relied upon by the D.R. as above. He further stated that for the assessment years 1982-83 to 1986-87 the assessee declared the value of plot at Rs.8,000, Rs.8,500, Rs.9,000, Rs.9,500 and Rs. 10,000 per marla. In appeal before the CIT(A) reduced the value of land to Rs.3,500 per marla for the assessment years 1982-83 and 1983-84 and to Rs.4,000 for the years 1984,85, 1985-86 and 1986-87. The department filed appeals against the orders of the CIT(A) before the I.T.A.T. who vide order in W.T.As. Nos.174 to 178/LB of 1987-88 (assessment years 1982-83 to 1986-87) rejected the appeals thereby confirming the rate adopted by the CIT(A). Taking the above facts into consideration the rates adopted by the A.A.C. are in accordance with the findings of the I.T.A.T. and its order for the earlier years. No interference is called for.
4. With regard to the execution of provision of taxation while determining the B.U.V. of shares as per rule 8(3) (c) (ii) and Rule 8(9) of the Wealth Tax Rules, 1963 for the assessment year 1991-92 the point was conceded by the D.R. Therefore, the action of the A.A.C. calls for no interference and is accordingly confirmed. In any case the department has not furnished certified copy of the impugned orders. The appeal is, therefore, incompetent.
5. With regard to the appeals of the assessee for the years 1991-92 and 1992-93 the A.R. argued that the adoption of value of Rs.16,000 and 17,500 per marla by the learned CWT (A) was unjustified as the value in question had not progressively increased to that extent.
6. We have considered the arguments putforth by the learned A.R. and find no merits in his contention especially when he did not cite any parallel case. It is also relevant to bring on record that the value of land all over the Pakistan including Faisalabad has escalated considerably The findings of the C.W.T. (A) are accordingly upheld
7. As a result all the seven appeals are dismissed being devoid of any force. M.S./290/Trib. Appeal dismissed.