PTD
2017
C.P. No.D-440 of 2012, decided on 13th July, 2017.
S. NASIM AHMED SHAH and 115 others Versus STATE BANK OF PAKISTAN through Governor and another
Court: Sindh High Court
Messrs SARFRAZ ICE FACTORY Versus CENTRAL BOARD OF REVENUE and another
Court: Lahore High Court
PTD
2004
I.T.As. Nos. 465-IB, 464-IB, 370-IB and 371-IB of 2003, decided on 6th August, 2003.
N/A
Court: Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Pakistan
PTD
1996
Writ Petition No. 2172 of 1996, decided on 21st April, 1996.
ALTAF CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Versus CENTRAL BOARD OF REVENUE and others
Court: Lahore High Court
PTD
2013
I.T.R.A. No.132 of 2011, decided on 7th May, 2013.
COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, ZONE-II, KARACHI Versus Messrs KASSIM TEXTILE MILLS (PVT.) LIMITED, KARACHI
Court: Sindh High Court
PTD
2008
Complaint No. 180-L of 2004, decided on 18th May, 2004.
IMRAN MUKHTAR Versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD
Court: Federal Tax Ombudsman
PTD
1963
Calcutta Cloth Agency v. Certificate Officers, 24‑Parganas (C R No. 1260 of 1955, decided on February 14, 1956, unreported); George v. Income‑tux Officer, Madras (1958) 33 I T R 22 ; Ladhu ram Taparia v. D. K. Ghosh (1956) 29 I T R 103 ; Metropolitan Structural Woks Ltd. v. Union of India (1955) 28 I T R 432 ; and Seghu Buchiah Setty v. Income‑tax Officer, Kolar Circle (1960) 38 I T R 204 ref.
AUTO TRANSPORT UNION (PRIVATE) LTD. Versus INCOME‑TAX OFFICER, ALWAYE
Court: Kerala India
PTD
1997
I.T.A. No. 2210/KB of 1995-96, decided on 24th December, 1996.
N/A
Court: Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Pakistan
PTD
2010
I.T.R.A. No.406 of.2007, decided on 15th December, 2009.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL ZONE, KARACHI Versus Messrs AQEEL KARIM DHEDHI, KARACHI
Court: Karachi High Court
PTD
2005
‑‑‑‑Ss. 156, 65 & Second Sched., Cl. (172)‑‑‑C.B.R. Circular No. 13 of 1985, dated 22‑12‑1985‑‑‑C.B.R. Circular No. 14 of 1985, dated 22‑12‑1985‑‑‑Rectification of mistake ‑‑‑Assessee, instead of filing appeal against the order passed under section 65 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, moved rectification application claiming set off additions made to his income against investment made in SNF Bonds under the whitening Scheme of Central Board, of Revenue‑‑‑rectification application was rejected by the Assessing Officer‑‑‑Representation made to Inspecting Additional Commissioner was also' rejected‑‑‑Appeal against such rejection was filed before First Appellate Authority which .was also rejected‑‑‑Appellate Tribunal remanded the case to First Appellate Authority with certain directions for fresh adjudication after hearing the assessee and Assessing Officer‑‑‑First Appellate Authority directed the Assessing Officer to comply with the judgment of High Court ‑‑‑Validity ‑‑First Appellate Authority had not considered and decided the issues involved in accordance with instructions of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal rather had merely followed the order of the High Court about which the Supreme Court had observed that it should be ignored‑‑‑Order of First Appellate Authority was set aside for de novo action by the Appellate Tribunal‑‑‑Supreme Court having directed that order of the High Court should not be followed and the appeal should be decided on merits, the First Appellate Authority should have decided the issues raised in appeal on merits without being influenced by the order of the High Court‑‑‑First Appellate Authority should summon the record and examine the declaration of SNF Bonds and hear the assessee and the Assessing Officer and consider their view points‑‑‑Claim made by the assessee regarding set off of assessed income against SNF Bonds should not be rejected merely on technical grounds and frivolous objections‑‑‑If the claim was in accordance with Cl. (172) of the Second Schedule of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 and C.B.R. Circular Nos. 13 & 14 of 1985, dated 22-12‑1985, then the claim should be allowed fully without any hesitation. \
N/A
Court: Income‑tax Appellate Tribunal Pakistan
