| Case ID |
2bbd0e07-7853-4bd4-8142-197f56a4aad9 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
I.T.As. Nos. 1101/LB of 2001 and 1102/LB of 1997 |
| Decision Date |
Jun 24, 2004 |
| Hearing Date |
May 05, 2004 |
| Decision |
The appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 1992-93 was allowed, while the appeal filed by the Department for the assessment year 1993-94 was dismissed. The Appellate Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer had improperly reopened the assessment under section 65 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, as it was based on information that was already available during the original assessment. The Tribunal ruled that once an assessment is completed and has attained finality, the Assessing Officer cannot exercise jurisdiction to revise it under the guise of reopening. The Tribunal's decision emphasized that there is no concept of amortization of expenses in income tax law, thus the direction of the learned CIT(A) regarding the expense on account of 'Golden Shake Hand' was upheld. |
| Summary |
This case revolves around the re-opening of income tax assessments under the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, focusing on the treatment of gratuity payments and the concept of amortization of expenses. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal addressed two appeals: one from the assessee challenging the re-opening of their assessment for 1992-93 and another from the Department regarding the treatment of 'Golden Shake Hand' payments. The Tribunal ruled that the Assessing Officer's actions were unjustified as they were based on previously available information and did not constitute new evidence. The case highlights critical aspects of income tax law, especially regarding the admissibility of expense claims and the limits of Assessing Officer's powers. The decision clarifies that the Income Tax Ordinance does not provide for amortization of expenses, a point that the Tribunal reiterated by referencing prior decisions. This ruling is significant for taxpayers and practitioners dealing with income tax assessments, providing clarity on the procedural aspects and rights of the assessee in challenging assessments. The keywords relevant to this case include 'Income Tax Ordinance', 're-opening of assessment', 'gratuity payments', 'amortization of expenses', and 'Income Tax Appellate Tribunal'. |
| Court |
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
Jawaid Masood Tahir Bhatti, Judicial Member,
Raja Sikandar Khan, Accountant Member
|
| Lawyers |
M. Iqbal Hashmi,
Sabiha Mujahid,
Shahid Jamil
|
| Petitioners |
Not available
|
| Respondents |
Not available
|
| Citations |
2005 SLD 23,
2005 PTD 237,
(2005) 91 TAX 90
|
| Other Citations |
1999 PTD (Trib.) 3901,
1999 PTD (Trib.) 2946,
2000 PTD (Trib.) 329,
1993 SCMR 1232,
1993 PTD 766,
2002 PTD (Trib.) 257
|
| Laws Involved |
Income Tax Ordinance, 1979,
Income Tax Rules, 1982
|
| Sections |
62,
65,
66,
66A,
134,
156,
94,
94(2)
|