Find a Lawyer

BEFORE MUHAMMAD MUNIR QURESHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MUHAMMAD TAUQIR AFZAL MALIK, JUDICIAL MEMBER versus BEFORE MUHAMMAD MUNIR QURESHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MUHAMMAD TAUQIR AFZAL MALIK, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Wealth Tax Act 1963 Sections 2 (16) (ii) and 17B Net Assets Loans were obtained against the Asset / Project The entire project was not offered to receive the tax after partially sold. The Assessing Officer conducted additional inspection of the entire responsibility claiming. The Commissioner canceled this assessment under section 17B of the Wealth Tax Act 1963 on the basis that it is believed that the entire project is responsible for imposing the Wealth Tax and when the entire project does not actually face the wealth tax, So a claim for liability was also required. The real estate assets against which the obligation was obtained through the acquisition of the bank loan should be available for the imposition of the property so that the liability against the declared total assets should be entered and the section 2 of the wealth (16) (ii) The provisions of the Taxes Act, 1963 were quite clear at this point that the wealth tax was not payable on this part of the assets as these assets were previously sold. As a result of the valuation date and the sale of these assets, it did not face financial tax on the asset, which violated the basic need to tax the assets against which the securities are due, it was not enough to have these assets. Wealth tax should be applied to the law. It is important to note that assets are available for Wealth tax deduction and where the Assets are not available for any reason, the demand for Wealth Tax cannot possibly be raised against them and according to the legal terms Claims for monopoly should be limited to this extent. (ii) Section 17B of the Wealth Tax Act, 1963 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1963 best law firm from Garh More lawyer