2001 PLP (Trib (PTD)
N/A
| Citation | 2001 PLP (Trib (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Pakistan |
| Bench Members | M. Munir Qureshi, Accountant Member and Khawaja Farooq Saeed, Judicial Member |
| Parties | N/A |
| Primary Law | Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 179) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2001 PLP (Trib (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 179) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2001 PLP (Trib (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Pakistan bench comprising: M. Munir Qureshi, Accountant Member and Khawaja Farooq Saeed, Judicial Member.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2001 PLP (Trib (PTD) (N/A). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Shahid Bashir, D.R. for Appellant.
- Mian Muhammad Javaid for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 17th August, 2000.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 50(4) & 52
Liability of persons failing to deduct or to pay tax
Withholding tax
Purchases not in the nature of supplies and largely unverifiable and also below Rs.25,000 in each case were not subject to withholding tax under the provisions of Income Tax Ordinance, 1979.
Judgment & Decree
M. MUNIR QURESHI (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER).
This appeal by Revenue is directed against order of CIT(A), Zone-I, Lahore, dated 5-8-1999, in which the First Appellate Authority has vacated the order passed under section 52 of the Ordinance holding the assessee to be in default of the provisions of section'50(4).
2. According to the department the assessee having made purchases of raw material and Bardana amounting to Rs.13,56,100 was required to withhold tax under section 50(4) and the CIT(A) has wrongly cited in his order that the assessee's purchases (excluding then from food depts) being largely unverifiable and also since these purchases did not exceed Rs.25,000 in each case, therefore, the assessee was not liable to withhold tax under section 50(4).
3. The assessee pleaded before CIT(A) that purchases referred to by Revenue are not in the nature of "supplies" and having been held to be (largely) unverifiable and also below Rs.25,000 in each case, could not be subjected to withholding tax provisions.
4. We have looked into the matter and we find that relief as accorded by the First Appellate Authority is justified by the operative facts and the department has not been able to make out a case to show that the provisions of section 50(4) are applicable in assessee's, case.
5. Resultantly, the departmental appeal fails. C.M.A./M.A.K./65/Tax(Trib.) Appeal dismissed.