Find a Lawyer

IFTIKHR AHMAD KHAN versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN

Government Employees (Talent and Discipline) Rules 1973 Rr 4, 5 & 6 Procedure under Government Employees (Talent and Discipline) Rules 1973, acting as Assistant Commissioner Income Tax on Government employees imposing major penalties. Income Tax Officer B16 of Assistant Commissioner Income Tax B17 was imposed following inquiry against him on charges of corruption, ineligibility and corruption against a civil servant. The case was that he had accepted as assistant commissioner of the Income Tax, the purchase price in connection with the shop as Assisi. Pune is shown in the statement that the inquiry was less money, according to the officer, and the officer was assessed by a successor shop space further charged that the government employee to do considerable damage caused revenue. There was mismanagement, incompetence and corruption in the act of public servant, which had sufficient evidence of the public servant, according to the statement of wealth, indicate the value declared by the Assistant, which shows the value of the shop announced in the registered work. Two-and-a-half times, the civil servant even went so far as to confront the department to bring any issue to the area. The price of such a store was estimated at much higher figures than it had accepted in that area. The statement from the department that by accepting the announced price, the officer should be subjected to corruption, especially when the statement of wealth was to accept the price of the shop. The public servant had, with good faith, secured Section 162 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, divorce advocates from Rohri lawyer