Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)---

----S. 59(1)---Self-Assessment Scheme---Self-Assessment Scheme for 1992-93, para. 6(e)---C.B.R. Circular No. 16 of 1992, dated 1-7-1992, para. 6(e)---Qualification of return filed under Self-Assessment Scheme-- Return filed by the association of person as new taxpayer:--Members of association of persons were existing assessees in their individual capacity-- Wealth statements were filed by the members of association of persons wherein net wealth of the members was given as over and above the presumed/admitted business capital of the A.O.P. under the provision of C.B.R. Circular No.16 of 1992---Return was processed under S.62 of Income Tax Ordinance, 1979---Validity---Assessing Officer was directed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) to accept the return of the Association of Person's under Self-Assessment Scheme as the provisions of the said circular created no bar on the qualification of the return under Self-Assessment Scheme---Income Tax Appellate .Tribunal confirmed the order of Income Tax Commissioner (Appeals) in circumstances.

Amjad Jamshaid, D. R. for Appellant.

A. S. Jafri, I.T.P. for Respondent.

Date of hearing: 25th February, 1998.

ORDER

S. M. S19TAIN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER). ---The Department, in this appeal, has objected to the order of the learned CIT(A) for cancelling the assessment order passed under section 62 of the Ordinance, with the directions that the respondent's return should be accepted under Self -Assessment Scheme and assessed under section 59(1), holding that the provisions of clause (e) or Paragraph-6 of Circular No. 16 is not a bar on the qualification of respondent's return under the Self-Assessment Scheme but a guideline for immunity to the source of business capital.

2. We have heard the learned representative of the two parties. Briefly, the facts are that the appellant is an Association of five Persons (AOP). Their names, NTN, Share in the AOP, and Circle where they are being assessed from year to year ace being reproduced hereunder from the impugned assessment order:

3. Two members of the AOP have purchased of flour mill on 8-1-1992 for a consideration of Rs.1,500,000. Their names as recorded in the sales deed are Mr. Muhammad Rafique and Mr. Muhammad Saleem. Admittedly, the respondent has filed the undermentioned documents vide letter dated 2-2-1994:

"Wealth statement of the member of A.O.P. for the period 3-6-1992 alongwith reconciliation statements and related documents, declaring gross/net wealth as under: --

4.The learned DCIT, however, has excluded the first return of total income filed on behalf of the AOP declaring total income, for five months, at Rs.35,000, because clause (e) of Paragraph-6 of the Circular No. 16 of 1992 dated t-7-1992 provides:

(e) In case a new tax payer derives income from a business, it shall be presumed that his business capital at the end of the income year was not more than three times the business income declared. Sources of his business capital to this extent shall not to be investigated."

5. Having given -bur careful consideration to the foregoing facts of the case and relevant provisions of the Self-Assessment Scheme for the year we are of the considered view that the finding of the learned CIT(A) does not warrant any interference; hence confirmed.

6. Consequently the appeal is dismissed.

M.B.A./533/Trib.Appeal dismissed.