Home Maxims & Terms Restriction of dis-allowance meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Restriction of dis-allowance

Restriction of dis-allowance legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)

2013 PTD 235 INLAND REVENUE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OF PAKISTAN Judicial Precedent
S.21(m)Deductions not allowedSalaries paid to employeesRestriction of dis-allowanceScope

Revenue authority contended that First Appellate Authority was not justified in restricting the disallowance made out of salaries paid to the employees; that S.21(m) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 clearly stated that no salaries expenses could be allowed if the amount paid other than cheque exceeded Rupees ten thousand, and that entire amount was to be disallowed rather than restricting the same

Taxpayer contended that First Appellate Authority was justified in restricting the disallowance exceeding Rupees ten thousand paid other than crossed cheque; and correctly worked out the disallowance to be made

Validity

While calculating the income from business the deduction should not be allowed, if salary exceeding Rupees ten thousand was paid other than by a crossed cheque

Admittedly in the present case salaries were paid in cash and exceeded Rupees ten thousand, therefore the same could not be allowed as business expense under the provision of S.21(m) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

First Appellate Authority mis-interpreted the law and restricted the disallowance made by the Taxation officer

Section 21(m) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 was enacted purposely to thwart fraudulent or sham transactions

Section 21(m) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 might be read in conjunction with main S.21 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 which unequivocally stated that "no deductions shall be allowed in computing the income from Business", if any salary paid or payable exceeded Rupees ten thousand per month other than through crossed cheque

First Appellate Authority misinterpreted the law by restricting the disallowance

Salaries paid to employees in cash were not allowable expenditure

Order of First Appellate Authority was vacated, wherein it, had restricted the disallowance and that of Taxation Officer was restored

Appeal was disposed of accordingly.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Restriction of dis-allowance", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124939684

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Restriction of dis-allowance"

PTD 2013
I.T.A. No.232/KB of 2011, decided on 2nd May, 2012.

2013 P T D (Trib

C.I.R., LD, LTU, KARACHI Versus Dr. ZULFIQAR H. TUNIO, Proprietor Laser — Inn Aesthetic Centre, Karachi

Court: Inland Revenue Appellate Tribunal of Pakistan
CLC 1983
Writ Petition No. 278 of 1983, decided on 18th July, 1983.

1983 C L C 1897

MESSRS ALLY BROTHERS & COMPANY‑Petitioner Versus THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, RAWALPINDI AND 5 OTHERS‑Respondents

Court: Lahore
MLD 1986
Constitutional Petition No. D‑322 of 1977, heard on 7th May 1986.

1986 M L D 1264

Before Sajjad Ali Shah and Mamoon Kazi, RASOOL BUX and 12 others‑‑Petitioners Versus OFFICER ON SPECIAL DUTY, FEDERAL LAND, COMMISSION AND JOINT SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD Respondent

Court: Karachi
PLD 1971
Second Appeal No. 38 of 1971, decided on 12th April 1971.

P L D 1971 Karachi 778

IMPERIAL DYEING AND PRINTING MILLS, KARACHI — Appellants Versus SAFDAR ALI — Respondent

Court:
PLD 1961
First Appeal from Order No. 49 of 1960, decided on 12th December 1960.

P L D 1961 (W

MUHAMMAD AZEEM AND OTHERS‑Appellants Versus MUHAMMAD NAWAZ AND OTHERS‑Defendants

Court:
CLC 2017
N/A

2017 C L C 450

Mst. RUKHSANA SAJJAD — Appellant Versus Syed MUHAMMAD AREEB — Respondent

Court: Lahore (Bahawalpur Bench)
CLC 1981
8th April 1980

1981 C L C 738

Raja MUHAMMAD SARWAR‑ — Appellant Versus Mst. MISRI JAN‑Respondent

Court: Lahore
CLC 1984
Second Appeal against. Original Order No. 10-D of 1981, decided on 4th September, 1983."

1984 C L C 521

GUL RAHIM KHAN alias KHAN‑Appellant Versus MUHAMMAD NAEEM KHAN alias NAEEM MUHAMMAD -Respondent

Court: Peshawar
PLD 1982
Second Rent Appeal No. 81 of 1978, decided on 9th July, 1981.

P L D 1982 Karachi 89

MRS. NAWAB DIN AHMED AND ANOTHER‑Appellants Versus FAIZUR REHMAN (REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL HEIRS)‑Respondent

Court: ‑‑‑ S. 13‑Ejectment proceedings‑Applicability of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908‑Civil Procedure Code, 1908‑Not applicable in terms to proceedings before Rent Controller and applicable only to extent provided for by Ordinance itself‑However, where no procedure provided just and convenient to apply principles of laid down by such Code..‑Interpretation of statutes.
CLC 1993
Writ Petition No. 47 of 1991, decided on 15th February, 1993.

1993 C L C 1042

ARSHAD BERKI and 3 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus SUB‑JUDGE (RENT CONTROLLER) MIRPUR,

Court: Azad J&K