Find a Lawyer

RAO & COMPANY, KARACHI versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD

Income Tax Ordinance 1979 Sections 62, 65 and 13 (1) (DD) Income Tax Rules, 1982, Circular No. 3 of the R207 ACBR 1967, dated April 1967, Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXV of 2000) ) Section 9, Section 9 & 2 (3) of the Stamp Act (II of 1899), Section 27A Additional Assessment Permanent Information The stamp duty valuation collector's valuation table was reviewed on which stamp duty was paid and by the Registrar There were copies of sales contracts and transfer sales. The proceedings filed under section 65 of the Income Tax Ordinance were initiated on the basis that the Department is fully aware that the value of the plot fixed under R207A of the Income Tax Rules was declared to be the lowest value. The rate, read with Sections 13 (2) and (3) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, based on the 1982 collector, was higher than the declared value at the time of assessment in the presence of the existing rules of stamp duty. Instead of evaluating the property based on the value of the collector, the officer assessing the open search for the Officer Assessment Officer has asked about the value of the property. In case of doubt, it was a conscious decision to accept the stamp duty value registrar. To quote the collector at what cost stamp duty was to be paid, but he failed to do so, nor was any information accurate to the Department nor any incorrect assessment was paid and it was merely a tax deduction. Assessment officer had value in the evaluation. Upon review by the Income Tax Officer through the Income Tax Officer, the collector's valuation is ordered to appraise a property at the collector's valuation rate which is available to the Income Tax Officer. online advocate from Umer Kot lawyer