KENHILL LTD., KARACHI versus I.T.O., CO. CIR. A-3, KARACHI
Income Tax Ordinance 1979 Sections 13 (1) and 136 additional reference to the payment of cash checks were made in the name of another party, after withdrawing the cash from the bank, the name of the other party, not the party. Has been made a payment officer, such increase is the amount paid on the basis that the check was not made through an illegal source and not due to the cash withdrawn from the bank. The payment was made, but in the name of another party, the main company explained that the money was received. Bearer Check checked his accounts department and said that the party was handed over to the accountant for payment and the identity of the party whose name was issued Bearer Check was denied. The facts and material have not been verified on the record, nor has the identity of the person who received payment from the Bank Effect Assistance set up this amount. His account books and then payments were made in favor of the party from whom the payment was made, and this was the amount that was received by stopping the check in the dispute received, therefore, by no means unknown. There was no justification for the incorporation of the assets of the Authority which was declared against the law and could not be retained.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
