| Case ID |
52aee560-1d18-4b95-a428-5d7367609cc0 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
MA (Stay) No.104/LB of 1995 |
| Decision Date |
Apr 20, 1995 |
| Hearing Date |
Apr 19, 1995 |
| Decision |
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal held that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) acted improperly by deciding the appeal ex parte without allowing the assessee an opportunity for a hearing. It was determined that the demand created against the assessee was heavy, and thus, the Tribunal stayed the income tax demand until a specified date or until the decision of the appeal, whichever came first. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of due process and the right to be heard in tax proceedings, highlighting that the Commissioner failed to properly serve notice to the assessee and could have utilized substituted service. The decision underscores the necessity for fair proceedings in tax assessments and appeals. |
| Summary |
In the case of Dr. Muhammad Aslam, who is a Dental Surgeon, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal addressed an appeal concerning a heavy tax demand created against him by the Income Tax Department. The appeal was filed after the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) had made an ex parte decision, indicating that the appellant was not traceable, a claim contested by the appellant's counsel. The Tribunal reviewed the circumstances surrounding the assessment and the subsequent appeal, focusing on the principles of fair hearing and proper service of notice. The Tribunal found that the Commissioner had not made adequate efforts to trace the assessee and could have used substitutes for service of notice. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to stay the tax demand and emphasized the necessity for the appellant to have an opportunity to present his case. This case highlights the importance of procedural fairness in tax law, where the rights of the taxpayer must be protected, especially in cases involving significant financial implications. The Tribunal's ruling serves as a reminder that due process should always be observed in tax assessments, ensuring that all taxpayers are afforded the opportunity to defend themselves against claims that may significantly impact their financial standing. |
| Court |
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
MUHAMMAD MUSHTAQ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER,
MUHAMMAD TAUQIR AFZAL MALIK, JUDICIAL MEMBER
|
| Lawyers |
Mian Ashiq Hussain,
Mrs. Sabiha Mujahid
|
| Petitioners |
Dr. Muhammad Aslam
|
| Respondents |
Not available
|
| Citations |
1996 SLD 2,
1996 PTCL 168,
1996 PTD 5
|
| Other Citations |
PLD 1982 Lah. 49,
(1967) 65 ITR (Sh. N.) (Re CIT, Gujrat v. A. Rehman & Co.),
1993 SCMR 1108 (ITO v. Chappal Builders),
77 ITR 955
|
| Laws Involved |
Income Tax Ordinance, 1979
|
| Sections |
134(6)
|