QAZI ANWER KAMAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant/taxpayer against the impugned order bearing Bar Code No. 100000118902109 dated 08.03.2022 passed by the learned Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals-VI), Karachi, as set- forth in the memo. of appeal.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual and non-resident assessee who filed her return of income at NIL for tax year 2018, voluntarily and the same was deemed to be an assessm ent order under section 120(1) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001. However, the return of income so filed was found to be erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of revenue.
Accordingly a show-cause notice under section 122(5A) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 was issued. In response, no reply was made, therefore the Additional Commissioner concluded the proceedings which then culminated in passing an order under section (5A) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001.
3. Being aggrieved with the order of the Additional Commissioner-IR, the tax payer preferred an appeal before the learned CIR (Appeals-VI), Karachi who confirmed the order passed by the Additional Commissioner-IR. Still dissatisfied, the taxpayer has preferred second appeal before this forum against the order passed by the learned CIR (Appeals-VI), Karachi.
4. On due date of hearing, Mr. Muhammad Immad Qamar, Advocate attended on behalf of the appellant/taxpayer whereas no one appeared on behalf of the Department/Respondent. Case was discussed with the learned authored representative in detail in the light of arguments, the orders of both below authorities, record available to the cost and the relevant provisions of law.
5. During the course of proceeding the learned AR vehemently argued his case. He contended that the Taxpayer is a non-resident. She has a dual nationality. She filed her return of income at NIL. On the ill advice of her tax consultant she filed. Declaration under Assets Declaration Ordinance, 2019 and declared her old properties therein. In the meantime Taxpayer obtained second opinion from another Tax Consultant who advised not to pay tax and file declaration as this declaration are only for those person who have unexplained and unreconciled wealth. Consequently Taxpayer did not pay tax thereupon. It is on this non-payment of tax in respect of the declared properties, that the Additional Commissioner treated the deemed order erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue and added total assets shown in declaration under section 111(1)(b) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 without confronting the Taxpayer. The learned A.R further contended that entire wealth is reconciled and explained. If the ACIR had followed the principle of natural justice and confronted the appellant/taxpayer, satisfactory reply would have boon filed. During the course of arguments the learned A.R submitted copies of properties documents to substantiate his claim.
6. We examined the impugned order and considered the arguments put forth by the learned A.R.
We observed that the Addl. Commissioner only issued notices through IRIS without following and adopting other modes of service of notices as provided under Section 218 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001. We also examined documents of properties and observed that the properties were purchased by the Taxpayer in 1993 and 1998 from verifiable and reconciled fund. Hence we feel that it is a matter of verification of facts and the documents produced before us need to be checked and verified by the department, therefore the case is remanded back to the department for reconsideration to thrash out the issue in the light of documents discussed above and verify the claim of the appellant to arrive at a just and judicious conclusion in strict accordance with law.
7. The appeal is disposed of as indicated above.