I.T.A. NO. 1794/KB OF 1999-2000 versus I.T.A. NO. 1794/KB OF 1999-2000
Income Tax Ordinance 1979 Sections 52, 50, 52A and 86 The liability of persons failing to pay or failing to pay additional tax jurisdiction In accordance with section 52/86 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1970, the orders of action could not be amended in nature. An officer who placed the original order or his successor in the office can rectify the error No other officer had the jurisdiction to rectify the error. In relation to a taxpayer, the assessment will be made by an officer. When an officer having jurisdiction over such an issue faces instability in the matter. The tax deduction or tax recovery, the diagnostic officer who by default has jurisdiction over the issue of SC, may initiate proceedings on the basis of the interpretation of section 52 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 and have jurisdiction over the person's case. It may be sued to the taxing officer from whom the tax was deducted or the depositor may also recover the deduction or deposit from the person from whom the tax deduction or deposit was to be made under section 22 86 of the Ordinance and under nature. The proceedings were of a completely independent nature and were not part of any other proceedings, nor were they required under any Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 Were subject to strong action, and when the order under section 52, asaysng officer was declared mandatory. Whether the liability of the tax was excluded on account of the presentation of the amount received in the tax order under section 50 or the receipt of the tax under section 52A of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 ? It cannot be deducted from one person or deposited with another
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
