Find a Lawyer

W.T.AS. NOS.205/LB TO 207/LB OF 1982-83, 300/LB OF 1986-87, 205/LB-II (DB) OF 1987-88, 356/LB versus W.T.AS. NOS.205/LB TO 207/LB OF 1982-83, 300/LB OF 1986-87, 205/LB-II (DB) OF 1987-88, 356/LB

Wealth Tax Act 1963 Sections 5 (1) (i), 2 (E) (II), 3 and Second Schedule, CL22 Exemption Property Charity Purpose The asset was leased for a long period by the Assisi exempted from the charge. Who claimed to be Property tax Because the property was for charitable purposes, the Assigning Officer rejected the claim and finalized its assessment. The first appellate authority found that the assets were exempt under section 5, the Wealth Tax Act, 1963, and they were not eligible for the Wealth Tax. The assets were covered under section 2 (e) (i) of the Asset Wealth Tax Act, 1963 and the exemption granted by the First Appellate Authority under Section 5 (1) (i) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1963 The estimate was unrealistic. That the assets of the Assisi (Chamber of Commerce) were not covered. Section 3 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1963 was similarly obtained before the minor, so the application of section 2 (e) (ii) of the Wealth Tax Act 1963 is irrelevant under the Wealth Tax Act 1963 There was a legitimate charge and there was a charge on the assets. If it was held for charitable purposes and thus its income could not be allocated for charitable purposes, the Appellate Tribunal found that the property / assets were held for charitable purposes but on a long-term basis. Was not rented. The order for the charitable nature of the Fleet Appellate Authority was canceled, while the Assisting Officer was reinstated by the Appellate Tribunal. best law firm from Pak Pattan Sharif lawyer