Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)---

----Ss. 59, 62 & 136(2)---Return under Self-Assessment Scheme-- Selection of case for total audit---First Appellate Authority partly allowed the appeal of assessee reducing, the estimation of sales-- Assessee for the first time agitated before Tribunal the question of selection of. his case for total audit---Tribunal rejected the appeal-- Validity---Tribunal was right in observing that issue of acceptance of return under self-assessment scheme was never a moot point before them---Acceptance of a return under self-assessment scheme generally did riot give rise to a question of law---High Court dismissed the reference being not competent as the question involved therein was not substantive in nature.

Aneel Sagar for Petitioner.

ORDER

The petitioner is an individual /assessee of the Income Tax Department. For the assessment year 2000-2001 he returned an income of Rs.1,06,600 under self-assessment scheme. On selection of his case for total audit his income was enhanced to Rs.2,40,000 through an assessment order framed on 18-5-2001.

2. He succeeded partly before the learned First Appellate Authority where estimation of sales was found to be excessive and, therefore, reduced to some extent.

3. Before the learned Tribunal for the first time, the assessee agitated against- the selection of his case for total audit. Learned Members of the Tribunal refused to entertain tile plea. Thereafter, they also rejected the plea of the assessee for reference of certain questions of law with regard to the selection of the case for total audit as proposed by the assessee. This has brought him before this Court under section 136(2) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 alleging that following questions of law have arisen out of the order of the Tribunal, dated 11-10-2001:---

(i)Whether the judgment made by the Hon'ble High Court Lahore in W.P. Nos.8003. 8004. 10611, 10612. 8683, 8389 and 10776 of 2001 was binding on the department'?

(ii)Whether the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Federal Tax Ombudsman was binding on the Department'?

(iii)Whether in the light of above judgments the Special Officer of Income Tax and Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Faisalabad were competent to assess and decide the cases of SAS selected through computer balloting"

(iv)Whether the selection of applicant's case for total audit was illegal, uncalled for and against self-assessment scheme'?

(v)Whether the Circular No. 7(7) S. Asstt./2000 Islamabad, dated 17-7-2001 issued to all Regional Commissioners could be ignored by the CIT(Appeals) Faisalabad or was not binding in 'nature'?

4. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, we are of the view that this reference petition is not competent. Learned Members of the Tribunal are right in observing that the issue of acceptance of return under self-assessment scheme was never a moot point before them. Even otherwise, it is our consistent view that generally the acceptance of a return under self-assessment does not give rise to the question of law to be answered by this Court. For, the question so involved in not substantive in nature.

5. Reference dismissed in limine.

S.A.K/1149/LReference answered,