COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE versus CH. MUHAMMAD AKRAM
Sections 122 (4) (a) and 122 (4) (b), after the amendment period, the taxpayer / assessee filed a tax return as used in section 122 (4) (b) of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 2, 2007, after which the taxpayer filed an amended return under section 114 of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 on 26 4 2008, under which the original assessment order was amended by the Appellate Tribunal on 12 1, 2010. It was further amended that further amendments were made in violation of Section 122 (4) (b) of the Ordinance, dated 12 1, 2010, which provided for a period of one year for any amending department that section 122 (4) has two separate and specific timelines (s) 122 (five years in 4).) (A) and one year in section 122 (4) (b), followed by sections 122 (4) (a) and 122 (4) (b) of both timelines. ) The language of the department accuracy I used was clear and clear. And both timelines were dealt with different periods of editing limits (s) The only difference in the evaluation orders was that both timelines had a different reference / starting point for calculating the threshold period and section 122 ( 4) (a) At the end of the financial year, the Commissioner has issued or acted upon it. The original assessment order has been issued to the taxpayers while section 122 (4) (b) begins at the end of the fiscal year in which the commissioner issued or acted on the amendment. The deferred order section was issued. 122 (4) (a) did not mean that the original assessment order could only be amended for the first time in a period of five years and that in fact it had actually been used as a starting point for the start of the threshold period. Evaluation order is referenced. Fill in the five-year period from the end of the financial year
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2013
