Find a Lawyer

COCA COLA EXPORT CORPORATION THROUGH WARRANEX J. CAREY, COUNTRY MANAGER versus INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (1&C)\', RANGE-II, COMPANIES, ZONE-1, LAHORE

Income Tax Rules 1982 R 20 [As Notified Notification Section R 773 (1) / 1992, dated 16 8 1992)] Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI 1979), Sections 135 and 136 Referral to Revised Assessment Return of Stock Sentence Accordingly, the Tribunal Appellate Tribunal did not accept the amended Income Tax Statement filed by the Assessment Tax Statement in this review, claiming that the alleged presence of an element of partially diversified and personal use such as stock No one can be allowed based on the sentence. Considering that being a solicitor or a legal person involves the personal use of a telephone-like facility, a more rigorous examination was required to bring the vehicles home, which is in fact the company's Used or taken advantage of by any employee / director of Directly or indirectly related to the Company's business where the question was raised in the reference, this question could not be raised in front of the Tribunals below. In its order under section 135 under the Income Tax Ordinance 1979, the present reviewer failed to file an appeal against the appellate authority's remand order on the issue of amending the amendment. In light of the amended provision, it could not be enjoined as a question of law, which had to arise from the tribunal's order under section 135 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979, or it was quoted as a natural consequence. Negative property advocate from Raiwind lawyer