VS, 2009 PTD-INCOME-TAX-APPELLATE-TRIBUNAL-PAKISTAN 1297 (2009)

Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001)---

----Ss.218, 162 & 154--Service of notices and other documents - Neither any evidence for service of notice had been furnished nor any evidence in this regard had been submitted by the Department---First Appellate Authority cancelled the order passed by the Taxation Officer under S.162 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 as he had treated the taxpayer in default for recovery of short deduction of tax which was deductible under S.154 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 but the Taxation Officer had passed the order without affording the opportunity of hearing to the assessee---Order of the First Appellate Authority was upheld by the Appellate Tribunal in the circumstances and the department appeal was dismissed.

Ahmed Saeed Siddiqui, D.R. for Appellant.

Abdul Tahir Ansari, ITP for Respondent.

ORDER

The Department through this appeal has objected to the impugned order of the learned CIT(A), dated 11-4-2007 on the following grounds:--

"(2) That the CIT(A) was not justified to cancel the assessment order passed under section 162 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 treating service of show cause as improper.

(3) That the CIT(A) was not justified to cancel the order whereas the show-cause notice was served on the proper person who had been receiving almost all other correspondence made by the Taxation Officer."

2. We have heard the learned representatives from both the sides and have also perused the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) and the assessment order.

3. We have found that on behalf of the appellant Department, neither any evidence of service of the notice has been furnished nor any evidence in this regard has been submitted. We have found that the learned CIT(A) has cancelled the order passed by the Taxation Officer under section 162 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 as he has treated the taxpayer in default for recovery of short deduction of tax which was deductible under section 154 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 but the Taxation Officer has passed the order without affording the opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

4. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we find no warrant to interfere in the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) which is upheld and the appeal filed by the Department is dismissed.

C.M.A./64/Tax (Trib.)Appeal dismissed.