Find a Lawyer

M.A. CONDS. NOS.507/LB TO 509/LB AND R.AS. NOS.286/LB TO 288/LB, OF 2002, DECIDED ON 30TH JULY versus M.A. CONDS. NOS.507/LB TO 509/LB AND R.AS. NOS.286/LB TO 288/LB, OF 2002, DECIDED ON 30TH JULY

The Income Tax Ordinance 1979 Sections 136 (1), 66A, 62/135 and 50 (4) (5) refer to the High Court as a factual claim that he was an indentor and commission agent and not an importer / supplier of income. The tax ordinance was accepted by the Assessing Officer under Section 62/135 of 1979 as directed by the First Appellate Authority and the order of the First Appellate Authority through a tribunal amendment of such studies under Section 66A of the Income Tax. The appeal against was dismissed. The Ordinance by the Inspection Additional Commissioner, 1979, under section 66A of the Income Tax Ordinance, was also dismissed by the Appellate Tribunal requesting the High Court, clear in its subsection (IA). As stated, action cannot be taken under the section. Consider the issues raised by the Inspecting Additional Commissioner, who was the subject of appeal before the Income Tax Commissioner and before the Appellate Tribunal issue in the present appeal. se - whether Assisi has earned income as an Indenture through the Import Commission or earned income as an Importer and Supplier already in front of the Appellate Tribunal Assessment Order approved by the Appellate Authority as well as the Assisting Officer. There had already been a case of appeal. Under section 62/13 of Income Tax Ordinance 1979, section 66A of the Income Tax Ordinance could not be amended in 1979 as per instructions of the first appellate authority by the Inspecting Additional Commissioner. The question of fact is not the question of law which has already been decided by the appellate tribunal in favor of the assessee in deduction of tax under Sections 50 (4) and 50 (5) of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979. best law firm from Mailsi lawyer