Está en la página 1de 2

2002 PTD 1 (S.C.Pak.

)
Whether an assessee can be held to be assessee in default for not having deducted tax under clause (a) of subsection (4) of section 50 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, if the Assessing Officer has not identified the recipients from whom tax should have been deducted. A perusal of above provision manifestly makes it clear that law itself has identified the parties from whom deduction is to be made. The amount of the payments has also been mentioned in the notice but the column of withheld tax indicates that it was not deducted and no reason in this behalf has been offered by the petitioner. Inasmuch as despite availaing sufficient opportunities before the Deputy Commissioner Income Tax no details were furnished for not deducting the tax. the Petitioner having notice/ knowledge that tax has to be deducted from the categories of the parties mentioned in the above noted provision of law itself has failed to fulfill its obligation , therefore, under these circumstances the Petitioner shall be considered to be assessee in default for not deducting the tax from the parties to whom the supplies were made by it. In our opinion, there was no necessity for the Assessing Officer to identify the names of the parties to whom the supplies were made because the record is maintained by the supplier i.e. Petitioner and it is the duty of the petitioner to maintain the record and show that as to why deductions were not made from different parties at the time of making supplies to them.

2010 PTD 2559 (Trib.)


Withholding tax is to be deducted at the time of payment and whatever the status of payment, deduction is to be made according to the procedure and rules laid under the Ordinance. Each and every provision of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 is required to be followed in letter and spirit to avoid any type of default or loss of revenue.

2012 PTD 122 (Trib.)


No transaction can be held to have escaped deduction u/s 161 unless it is established that: (i) Taxpayer is a withholding agent; (ii) A particular transaction is liable to deduction/withholding; and (iii) That a specified tax of a specific person was to be withheld, who could take credit of the tax recoverable under section 161.

2003 PTD 1343/ 88 TAX 147 (H.C. Lah.)


Imposition of additional tax or prosecution for an offence were independent actions, which were not mutually exclusive and did not in any way affect, prejudice or exclude each other and could both be resorted to at the same time in appropriate cases.

2010 PTD 1904 (Trib.)


If tax is admittedly due and not paid on due date, it amounts to utilization of public exchequer and compulsion of payment of additional tax is quite in accordance with equity and principle of natural justice. [Also 2010 PTD 2490 (Trib.)]

2002 PTD 201 (H.C. Lah.)


Completion of assessment in the case of recipients did not absolve withholding agent from its obligation. Authority found the assessee company to have withheld tax at a lesser rate from its dealers Tribunal was of the view that Department had made credit in the case of recipients to the amounts actually withheld in their cases, and if the assessee was still of the view that parts of amount required to be withheld had already been received by Department after framing of assessments in the cases of recipients, the assessee could make application for rectification giving the details of amount of tax deducted or received by Department from recipients.

2012 PTD 25 (Trib.)


Notice u/s 161 was issued on 29.12.2010 in respect of period relating to tax year 2005. Taxpayer was required to maintain record for tax year 2005 till 30.06.2010. Notice issued after 30.06.2010 and order passed u/s 161 on its basis not maintainable.