W.T.AS. NOS. 1414/LB AND 1415/LB OF 2000, DECIDED ON 26TH FEBRUARY, 2002. versus W.T.AS. NOS. 1414/LB AND 1415/LB OF 2000, DECIDED ON 26TH FEBRUARY, 2002.
Order passed under Section 16 (3) of the Wealth Tax Act 1963 Section 35 and Second Schedule, CL 12 (2) Section RO 595 (I) / 96, Correction of Errors 796 1996, Factory / Manufacturing Unit as well as Cell 16 (3). Discounts are allowed when doing. Of the Wealth Tax Act; prohibited by amendment of the order mentioned under section 35 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1963, 1962. Didn't the audit party rely solely on the issues identified by the audit party that were highlighted by the audit party in relation to the exemption by the highlighting officer, and by the assessing officer No other defect was identified which meant that the action tax under section 35 of the wealth The Act, 1963, was initiated solely on the basis of the audit party's recommendations, which the assessing officer did not follow, but blindly relied on the audit and inspection authority's report on which it depended. The Tribunal Assisting Officer did. The Tribunal appealed to the Department of Appeal to initiate an audit and inspection authority report, emphasizing section 35 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1963, which was not guaranteed under section 35 of the Wealth Fax Act, 1963. Rejected
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
