COMMISSIONER GENERAL OF INLAND REVENUE

COMMISSIONER GENERAL OF INLAND REVENUE

Vs.

PIGOTT CHAPMAN AND COMPANY

COURT OF APPEAL
J. DE SILVA,
J. WENGAPPULI, J.
CA/TAX/02/2017
TAC/IT/019/2014
SEPTEMBER 18, 2018

Tax Appeals Commission Act, No. 23 of 2011, sections 9(a), 9(b), 9(c), 11A(1), 11A(3), 11A(5), 11A(6), 11A(7)-Case stated-Can only a legal or natural person be a party to a case stated?-Nature of a case stated under the Tax Appeals Commission Act-Inland Revenue Act, No. 10 of 2006, sections 77(2), 165(1), 217-Interpretation Ordinance, section 2(s)-Partnership-Doctrineof approbation and reprobation-Necessary parties-Natural justice-Costs

The respondent is a partnership having Chapman International (Pvt) Ltd and Ayman Abdul Cader as partners. The returns of the respondent for the years of assessment 2009/2010 and 2010/2011 were rejected by the assessor, who proceeded to make his own assessments. As the respondent's appeal to the Commissioner General of Inland Revenue was unsuccessful, the respondent appealed to the Tax Appeals Commission (TAC), which annulled the assessments of the assessor. The appellant then moved the TAC to forward a case stated to the Court

Click Here to Read the rest of this document