| Case ID |
26617a90-d976-4114-8305-c18df36fdebd |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
I.T.A. No. 6115/LB of 1996 |
| Decision Date |
Sep 16, 1996 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The court found that the assessment made by the Assessing Officer was not a best judgment assessment. The assessee, who returned nil income, had participated in the proceedings but failed to comply with a notice under section 61. As a result, the Assessing Officer proceeded ex parte under section 63. The court noted that the valuation of the factory building was excessive and did not consider the age and condition of the building. The first appellate authority confirmed the assessment in a cursory manner, failing to adequately address the arguments presented by the assessee. Consequently, the court set aside both the assessment order and the first appellate order, remitting the case back to the Assessing Officer for reappraisal, allowing the assessee an opportunity to present evidence regarding property valuations and the condition of the factory building. |
| Summary |
This case revolves around the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, specifically focusing on best assessments under section 63 and unexplained investments under section 13(1)(d). The assessee, returning nil income, faced an assessment based on a property valuation that was deemed excessive. The court highlighted the lack of adequate comparison in property valuations and the failure to consider the age of the factory building in question. The decision underscores the importance of fair assessment practices and the necessity for tax authorities to provide substantial evidence when disputing an assessee's claimed values. By remitting the case to the Assessing Officer, the court emphasized the right of the assessee to challenge the valuation and present relevant evidence, ensuring transparency and fairness in tax assessments. Keywords include Income Tax Ordinance, best judgment assessment, unexplained investment, and property valuation. |
| Court |
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
NASIM SIKANDAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER),
INAM ELAHI SHEIKH (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)
|
| Lawyers |
Waqar Azeem Ch.,
Mian Javed-ur-Rehman
|
| Petitioners |
Not available
|
| Respondents |
Not available
|
| Citations |
1998 SLD 4,
1998 PTD 16,
1999 PTCL 70
|
| Other Citations |
Not available
|
| Laws Involved |
Income Tax Ordinance, 1979
|
| Sections |
63,
13(1)(d),
61
|