I.T.A. NO-251/K]3 OF 1999-2000 VS I.T.A. NO-251/K]3 OF 1999-2000, 2000 PTD-INCOME-TAX-APPELLATE-TRIBUNAL-PAKISTAN 1443 (1999)

Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)---

----Ss. 59(1) & 65---Self-Assessment---Additional assessment ---Assessee filed return under Self-Assessment Scheme declaring net profit rate 9.32 % and assessment was finalized by applying 15% G.P. rate by the Department-- Case was reopened on the basis of an amount deposited in the Bank in respect of sale which was not accounted for by the assessee---Assessee explained that commission received from such sale was equal against expenses incurred on such sale and, therefore, income horn such sale was not declared ---Explanation of assessee was not accepted by the Assessing Officer and addition was made---First Appellate Authority instead of accepting the assessee's version that the case should be accepted under Self-Assessment Scheme, reduced the net profit rate to 5 % as against 9.32 % declared by assessee and 15% G.P. rate applied by the Department---Validity---First Appellate Authority had given sufficient cause for reducing the net profit rate to 5 % and, therefore, no interference was called for in the impugned order-- Departmental appeal was dismissed in circumstances.

Shaukat Soomro, D.R. for Appellant.

Abdul Tahir, I. T. P. for Respondent.

Date of hearing: 16th December, 1999.

ORDER

The Department in- this appeal has objected to the order of the learned A.A.C., dated 21-8-1999 reducing the application of N.P. rate at 5% as against 9.32 % declared by the assessee and 15 % G. P. rate applied by the Department.

2. Mr. Shoukat Soomro, learned representative of the appellant Department has contended that the original assessment was completed under Self-Assessment Scheme as the assessee has the history of Self-Assessment. Later on it came to the knowledge of the Department that assessee has deposited the amount to the tune of Rs.9.,88,598 during the year under consideration in his account in U.B.L. So, the case was reopened under section 65 of the Ordinance and as there was clear concealment of income, therefore, Assessing Officer determined the total income as under:---

3. On the other hand, Mr. Abdul Tahir, I.T.P., learned representative of the assessee has contended that the assessee explained the Assessing Officer about the said amount deposited in the account and a certificate of Mr. Abdul Rehman, Contractor Railway N.T. No. 8-13-1900184 was submitted who has confirmed that he has purchased electric goods from the assessee amounting to Rs.7,00,000 and trading account of the same amount was filed showing sales of Rs.7,00,000 and commission @ 1-1/2% coming to Rs.10,500 but due to the expenses of salary of Rs.7,200 travelling expenses of Rs.2,000 and miscellaneous expenses of Rs.1,300, there was Nil income and it was, therefore, not declared. But the Assessing Officer did not accept the version of the assessee. According to learned A.R., the learned A.A.C. should have to accept the declared version but he has also reduced the net profits rate to 5 % and the assessee having its business at Sukkur could not file the appeal against that order. He has, therefore, requested to dismiss of appeal of the department.

4. I have heard both the learned representatives and have also perused the impugned order and the assessment order. I have observed that the learned A.A.C. has given sufficient cause for reducing the N.P. rate to 5%. I, therefore, find no warrant for interference in the impugned order and the appeal of the department is dismissed.

C.M.A./M.A.K./9/Tax(Trib.) Appeal dismissed.