COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, RAWALPINDI versus ABDUL RASHID, PROPRIETOR, AMIN RASHED & CO., BAZAR DALGRAN, RAWALPINDI
Additional Assessment Additional Reference Assessment was finalized under the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 Sections 65, 13 (1) (AA) (D), 59 (L) and 136 Self Assessment Scheme The property and Department of Excise and Department purchased by Assisi Taxation Evaluates Price Over Same Price The officer evaluating the show in CellDad re-evaluated it under Section 65, Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 and added the difference in the price allowed by the Excise and Taxation Department. What was done and the resulting cell-dead version was previously dismissed and confirmed by the appellate authority. The Appellate Tribunal Department filed a reference regarding the double approval of the Assistant Commissioner, who inspected the Income Tax Verification, if the appeals were dismissed only on the grounds of absence of double approval, then the Tribunal. The proper way was to get a remand to the officer who determined the cases to be resolved. First Appellate Authority dismissed the increase in facts There was no evidence on record to prove the value of the e-property because the plea of reference filed by the Assamming Officer was rejected by the High Court because it contained no law. There was no question.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
attorney vs advocate vs counsel from Chakwal lawyer
