| Case ID |
322fd4a9-6cde-48e4-9f11-b390e3434ecd |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
I.T.As. Nos. 117/LB to 122/LB of 1986-87, 569/LB a |
| Decision Date |
Jun 26, 1988 |
| Hearing Date |
Jun 21, 1988 |
| Decision |
The tribunal ruled on the interpretation of statutes and the principles surrounding depreciation allowances. It clarified that the intent of the legislature must be adhered to, and in cases of ambiguity, reference to earlier legislation is permitted. The tribunal emphasized that depreciation allowances should only be deducted from actual costs based on the depreciation that was allowed, not the total claimed. The decision reasserted the need for accurate assessments in cases where assets were used for both business and personal purposes, leading to a directive for the assessing officer to make appropriate inquiries and adjustments based on the actual usage of assets. |
| Summary |
This case revolves around the Income Tax Ordinance and the interpretation of depreciation allowances in relation to assets used for both business and personal purposes. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, presided over by Chairman Farhat Ali Khan and members Abrar Hussain Naqvi and A. A. Zuberi, deliberated on several key legal principles concerning the interpretation of statutes. The tribunal emphasized the importance of adhering to legislative intent when it comes to tax laws, particularly regarding depreciation. The court clarified that depreciation should only be deducted based on what has been legally allowed in previous assessments, rather than the total claimed by the taxpayer. This case serves as a significant reference for understanding how depreciation allowances are treated in tax assessments, especially when assets serve dual purposes. The ruling highlighted the necessity for tax authorities to conduct thorough inquiries into asset usage, ensuring fair assessments that align with established legal frameworks. The implications of this decision are critical for taxpayers and tax professionals navigating the complexities of tax law, especially in areas concerning asset depreciation and personal use claims. Key terms include 'depreciation allowance', 'Income Tax Ordinance', and 'asset usage'. |
| Court |
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
Farhat Ali Khan (Chairman),
Abrar Hussain Naqvi (Judicial Member),
A. A. Zuberi (Accountant Member)
|
| Lawyers |
Siddiqui Akhtar Chaudhry, I.T.P. for Appellant/Respondent,
Nazir Ahmed Saleemi, A.C./D.R. for Respondent/Appellant
|
| Petitioners |
Not available
|
| Respondents |
Not available
|
| Citations |
1988 SLD 79,
1988 PTD 734,
(1988) 58 TAX 148
|
| Other Citations |
P L D 1976 Lah. 1502,
Kirkness v. John Hutson & Co. Ltd. (1955) 2 All ER 345,
C.I.T. (Madras) v. Indian Bank Ltd. AIR 1965 SC 1473,
Sevantilal Maneklal v. C.I.T. A I R 1968 SC 697,
C.I.T. v. Maburat Mills fro. Ltd. (1973) 89 I T R 45
|
| Laws Involved |
Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979),
Income Tax Act (XI of 1922)
|
| Sections |
Sched. III, Rr.1, 2 & 8(7)(b)(ii),
S.10(2)(n)
|