Find a Lawyer

I.T.A. NO. 4258/LB OF 2001, DECIDED ON 11TH MARCH, 2002. versus I.T.A. NO. 4258/LB OF 2001, DECIDED ON 11TH MARCH, 2002.

Section 66A & 59 (1) CBR Circular No. 18, 1999 dated 11-9 1999, Additional Commissioner's inspection powers for reviewing the order assessment year of the Deputy Commissioner, Section 59 of the inspection of the 1999 2000 Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 (1) The evaluation was finalized. The Additional Commissioner dismissed the assessment on the basis that the declared income was less than the income made for the assessment year 1996 97 97 under section 62 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 and the assessment officer had to evaluate the de novo. Was instructed to do. The year 1996 19 19 was completed on 5 1999 1999 1999 while the assessment for the year 99 99 99 99 was completed under section 4) (1999) of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 1979959 1979 (1999). Was considered to be invalid because no regular evaluation order was approved in connection with the assessment. The income declared for the assessment year 1998 99 and for the assessment year 1999 2000 was to be compared with the previous assessment year 1998 99 i which was assessed under section 59 (4) of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 6 was completed in 1999 and the terms of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 and the Income Tax Ordinance could not be laid to seek Section 66A of the Income Tax Ordinance for seeking Section 66A of the Income Tax Ordinance. The Additional Commissioner, examining the accuracy of 1979, misinterpreted the CBR Circular No. 1999, which was dated 119 1999, as the Income Tax Ordinance made on section 59 (4) of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979, 306 on 1999. Was checked. Declaration to behave for the assessment year 1998 99 / Announcement of last resort of income, as announced by Circular No. 8 of 1999, dated 11,999 and that is the most common list of advocates from Jamshoro lawyer