1997 PLP (Trib (PTD)
N/A
| Citation | 1997 PLP (Trib (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Ahsan Alam, Accountant Member and M. Saleem Shad Qureshi, Judicial Member |
| Parties | N/A |
| Primary Law | Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1997 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 1997 PLP (Trib (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Pakistan bench comprising: Ahsan Alam, Accountant Member and M. Saleem Shad Qureshi, Judicial 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
- Masood Ali Jamshed, D.R. for Appellant (in I.T.A. No.589/LB of 1991-92)
- Asif Bhatti, A.R for Respondent (in I.T.A No. 589/LB of 1991-92).
- Asif Bhatti, A.R for Appellant (in I.T.As. Nos.3045/LB and 3044/LB of 1991-92).
- Masood Ali Jamshed, D.R for Respondent (in I.T.As. Nos.3045/LB and 3044/LB of 1991-92).
- Date of hearing: 4th April, 1996.
Headnotes / Summary
S.22
Add backs
G. P. rates
Both department and- assessee were in cross appeals
Department against justification in reducing add -backs
Assessee against enhancement of G.P. rate
C. I. T. (A) orders were assailed
Held, going through orders of Authorities below, Tribunal was of opinion that orders were quite reasonable and comprehensive in given circumstances
Appeals dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
Asif Bhatti, A.R for Appellant (in I.T.As. Nos.3045/LB and 3044/LB of 1991-92). Masood Ali Jamshed, D.R for Respondent (in I.T.As. Nos.3045/LB and 3044/LB of 1991-92). Date of hearing: 4th April, 1996. M. SALEEM SHAD QURESHI (JUDICIAL MEMBER).
First two cross-appeals one by the department and the other by the assessee have been filed pertaining to assessment year 1989-90. Whereas the 3rd appeal retaining to assessment year 1990-91 has been filed by the assessee/appellant only. Since all the three appeals involved similar type of facts and issues, we, therefore, propose to dispose of all these appeals under consideration through one combined order.
2. Department as well as the assessee-appellant has come into appeal against the order of the learned CIT(A), Lahore vide his A.O. Nos. 204 and 239, dated 13-10-1991 pertaining to assessment years 1989-90 and 1990-91.
3. We have heard both the parties and gone through the orders of the authorities below and also considered all the grounds of the appeals pertaining to assessment years under consideration. In the assessment year 1989-90, departmental objection is that the learned CIT (A) was not justified in reducing the add-backs made under the heads conveyance from Rs.50,000 to Rs.25,000 and petrol from Rs.10,000 to Rs.4,000 and entertainment from Rs.3,000 to Rs.2,000 being unvouched and unverifiable. Whereas on the other hand the assessee-appellant has agitated that G.P. rate of 19% as against declared G.P. rate of 15% to be excessive. Whereas in the assessment year 1990-91 only the assessee-appellant has come forward to agitate the G.P. rate of 19% as against declared rate of 14.98% to be excessive.
4. Considering all the aspects of the case and going through the orders of the authority below, we are of the opinion that the order of the learned CIT(A) is quite reasonable and comprehensive in the given circumstances of the case. The learned CIT (A) has thoroughly considered the issues of application of G.P. rate and also the fixation of add-backs. The finding of the learned CIT (A) is quite reasonable and proper which calls for no interference on our behalf. We, therefore, do not feel inclined to comment on the well-founded verdict of the learned CIT (A). Both the cross-appeals one by the department and the other by the assessee-appellant pertaining to assessment year 1989-90 and the 3rd appeal filed by the assessee-appellant pertaining to assessment year 1990-91 are hereby dismissed accordingly. C.M.S./312/Trib. Appeals dismissed.