I.T.AS. NOS.2741/LB, 2742/LB AND 2743/LB OF 1995 VS I.T.AS. NOS.2741/LB, 2742/LB AND 2743/LB OF 1995
1997 P T D (Trib.) 1889
[Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Pakistan]
Before Muhammad Zaman Khan, Judicial Member
I.T.As. Nos.2741/LB, 2742/LB and 2743/LB of 1995, decided on 01/02/1996.
(a) Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)----
----S.63---Ex parte assessment---Ex parte assessment was made against assessee---First Appellate Authority upheld same to the grievance of assessee---Tribunal held though assessee had filed appeal but his attempt for relief seemed to be half-hearted as his grounds of appeal appeared to be mercy petition---Assessing Officer assessed the total income of assessee to the best of his judgment, in circumstances---No interference was asked for in appeal.
(b) Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)---
----S.63---Ex parte assessment---Remand---Consensus of opinion---Ex parte assessment was made against assessee---First Appellate Authority upheld same to the grievance of assessee---Assessee prayed for remand of case for further, probe to meet ends of justice- Department having not objected to such request the case was remanded for fresh decision according to law.
Sh. Ikram-ul-Haq for Appellant.
Javaid-ur-Rehman, D.R. for Respondent.
Date of hearing: 24th January, 1996.
ORDER
The captioned three appeals have been field by the assessee in which common order dated 14-3-1995 passed by the then CIT (A) Zone-IV. Lahore pertaining to the Assessment years 1983-84. 1990-91 has been challenged. Earlier Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-19 Kasur had recorded a jointly order on 28-6-1994 formulating assessment under section 63/132 relating to the Assessment Year 1983-84 and under section 63 for the assessment years 1990-91 and 1991-92. The assessee derives income from Brick kiln.
2. We have heard the learned authorized representatives of both the parties and have also gone through the orders which are borne on the appeal files, having been passed at the forums below.
3. The appeals are decided as follows:---
Assessment years 1983-84
4. In this year income was derived from the brick kiln by an A.O-P. Computation of income has been finalised for this Assessment Year by estimating sales at Rs.413,412 as detailed in the assessment order. The appeal filed by the assessee against the assessment order passed under section 63/132 has been rejected and all the objections raised by the assessee before the first appellate authority, as is manifest from the impugned order, have since been rejected, being devoid of force.
5. Although the assessee has filed appeal in the Tribunal against the order of CIT(A) for the Assessment Year 1983-84 but the attempt made by the assessee for the grant of relief, as is clear from his grounds of appeal, is half-hearted. The grounds of appeal appear to be a mercy petition and does not disclose any precise reason for the acceptance of appeal against the impugned order. According to the averments made in the grounds of appeal the assessee has stated that it was the first year of assessment and the assessee had no past experience in this line of business and no sale of bricks as made during this year. The prayer of the assessee in this appeal is that "slue relief under the law may kindly be allowed".
6. As explained above we are afraid, simply on the above grounds of appeal, it is not possible for us to hold that the orders passed by the authorities below were unjustified. The Assessing Officer appears to have made ex parte assessment to best of his judgment and knowledge and the order passed by him has been maintained by the first appellate authority, confirming the applied G.P. rate on the basis of the treatment accorded by the department in other such cases and expenses allowed being adequate, looking to the quantum of G.P.
7. In the above circumstances, the assessee has miserably failed to make out a case for our interference in the order passed by the first appellate authority. As such the appeal filed by the assessee for the Assessment Year 1983-84 is dismissed.
Assessment years 1990-91 and 1991-92
8. As the points requiring our determination in both years are of identical nature, the appeals filed by the assessee in this regard are being disposed of together.
9. It has been submitted on behalf of the assessee appellant that Notices were served upon the assessee on 14-6-1994 for 19-6-1994 thus time allowed was too short to make compliance and thus ex parte assessments for these two years for a single default were not proper to finalize assessments under section 63. It has been further submitted that the A.O.P. had since been superseded by a registered firm in these years and copy of the order passed by the Assistant Income Tax Officer Circle-19 Kasur passed under section 68 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 pertaining to the assessment year 1990-91 was also produced at the lower forums, which was unfortunately ignored. A copy of this order has also been shown to us at the time of arguments, and the same has since been placed on the record. A copy of the assessment form I.T. 30-B relating to the assessment year 1991-92 has also been placed on the record at the time of arguments by the learned A.R. of the assessee concerning to the newly registered firm known as M/s. Kohinoor Brick Kiln N.T. No.6-19-1532062. In these circumstances it has been submitted on behalf of the assessee that CIT(A) was not justified to reject the claim of the assessee of being a partner in the said registered firm to the extent of 1/4th share and thus the order passed by him for these two assessment years was illegal. It seems that the contention which has been raised by the learned A.R. of the assessee is not totally devoid of force.
10. Besides the above, learned A.R. of the assessee has further argued that CIT(A) was not justified to confirm the income of the Brick kiln at Rs.70,000 and Rs.75,000 for the two years under review respectively without going into the details, proper computation of income and the extent of business and thus the assessments made were bad and not sustainable at law.
11. Learned A.R. of the assessee, in the given State of affairs, has, therefore, concluded that the assessments for these two years may be set aside for further probe so that all the points at issue may be resolved and even handed justice be done to both the parties. When confronted with the above situation learned D.R. representing the revenue has also gracefully conceded the prayer made by the learned A.R. of the assessee, regarding the remand of the cast for these two years. It appears that the consensus of opinion as exhibited by the learned representatives of both the parties, as pointed out above, is proper and reasonable and deserves to be favourably considered.
12. In view of what has been observed above, the appeals filed by the assessee pertaining to the Assessment Years 1990-91 and 1991-92 are accepted and as a consequence of the same the assessment orders passed by the authorities below are hereby set aside for de novo proceedings, to be conducted in accordance with law and after providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to both the parties. It is expected that the authorities concerned shall also record their findings on all the issues which are raised before them.
13. As a sequel to the above, all the three appeals stand disposed of accordingly.
M.S./258/(Trib.) ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Order accordingly.