Find a Lawyer

W.T.AS. NOS.2666/LB TO 2670/LB OF 2000 versus W.T.AS. NOS.2666/LB TO 2670/LB OF 2000

Income Tax Ordinance 1979 Section 52, 50 (4) (a) and 143B liability of persons who fail to pay tax deductions or fail to pay the fixed amount of a private company involved in construction works, Income Tax Ordinance 1979 The statement was filed under section 143B of the US. Which was accepted, then, on the showcase notice, the tax was paid under section 52 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979, on the basis of which 65% of the contractor's receipts were determined by the first appellate authority as the purchase order. had gone. Just to say that if a business is a subsidiary, it has to make some purchases and the provisions responsible for the deduction of such purchases have been attracted so that it can default to it. Can also be fined as Rs. By default it could be adjusted, so the tax would have to be adjusted against the recipient, where the purchase was unrecognizable. It was also unnecessary to set aside any deductions and by default, it was considered unreasonable to be set aside by the First Appellate Authority as it had left the department and was rejected by the Tribunal. ? top civil advocates from Sara e Naurang lawyer