Find a Lawyer

MESSRS ARID FLOUR MILLS, LAHORE versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD

Income Tax Ordinance 1979 Sections 66A, 5 (5) and 59 (1) Establishment of the Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXXV of 2000), Sections 9 and 2 (3) showcase notice under section 66A of the Income Tax Ordinance The issuance, 1979, pointed out that the Assisi under section 59 (1) of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 was invalid because it was prejudicial to the interest of income tax as the Assessing Officer who finalized this assessment. , With no jurisdiction over the matter. A protest was presented to the Commissioner Income-tax, which requested to leave the proposed action, as well as a notice of the Federal Tax Ombudsman show for action under Section 66A of the Income Tax Ordinance. The Commissioner canceled before 1979 the hearing of the complaint on the effect of the Federal Tax Ombudsman's remarks that since the complainant's complaint was resolved, the matter could have been closed if it had not been examined on record. Some serious flaws / inconveniences have been exposed which will be recorded by the inspector additional commissioner. Checking that the Assigning Officer who fulfilled this assessment said that he thought the order was wrong but did not make any attempt to see that Re Revenue was discriminatory in the interest of income as well as income tax. The non-existence of both elements was also illegal in the inspecting Additional Commissioner inspecting Section 66A of the Ordinance 1979. Failure to recall the provisions of Section 5 (5) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, was fraudulent with knowledge of the law as soon as a review files returned to a jurisdiction. power of attorney advocate Malakwal lawyer