Find a Lawyer

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAWALPINDI versus MST. SHAKEELA BANG

Sections 56, 61, 135 and 136 (1) before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal effect dispute The question regarding the High Court jurisdiction regarding the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal effect dispute was not raised, the 1979 Tribunal found that the notice The review was never processed, the authority's validity high court's appeal under section 136 (1) of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 was dismissed, only the results entered could be processed and the answer to this question Can also give birth to The order of a tribunal listed under section 135 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 on the request of a reference under section 136 (1) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 cannot be the same as the order of the tribunal under section 135 of the Income Tax Ordinance. ? , 1979 Where the Tribunal had recorded this notice under section 576 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, the reviewer was never served on that review, in response to the blood returned by the authorities. It cannot be raised in any of the issues raised because neither the question was raised before the Tribunal nor was it ruled that the High Court could only answer the question which the Tribunal could not answer. Was erected and ruled by them or was born as a natural consequence of that order, the wave Neither of the two was answered in the Wadda case, the High Court refused to answer the questions as reference to the framework was rejected in those circumstances. jobs for advocates from Madinah lawyer