Find a Lawyer

PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD. (NESPAK), LAHORE versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD

Wealth Tax Act 1963 Section 31 Income Tax Ordinance (XXXX of 1979), Section 77 (2) Establishment of Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXXV of 2000), Sections 9 (2) (a) and 14 (8) of the Constitution of Pakistan ( 1973), Article 199 Review Petition The Federal Tax Ombudsman recommends that the money recovered from the complainant be returned to Tai as the beer was illegally exported against the same company's demand for wealth tax. I was one of the complainant shareholders, the Revenue Division revised the decision. On the basis that at the time of filing the complaint, the matter was already a subpoena before the High Court in the constitutional petition filed by the shareholders, and the administrative office should not vacate or expect the judicial determination, therefore, the jurisdiction of the office. The Ombudsman was forbidden to use the word of property / matters used in section 9 (2) of the Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance, 2000 established office, the matters referred to in section (1), viz. , Complaint, reference or motion to be referred to in section 9 (1) of matters relating to any special charge of administration in the mal mal matters mal. Can't think of what has gone or gone. The reference to the said ordinance or any other matter in which the constituent petition filed by the shareholder in the same case before the High Court cannot, therefore, exclude the jurisdiction of the Office Ombudsman in the present complaint by another shareholder. The office would have been familiar. After the filing of the constitutional petition, the outcome of the present complaint will neither be different nor depend on the investigation, until the High Court has established the office of the Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance Office. immigration advocates email from Talhur lawyer