COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE (ZONE-I), R.T.O. RAWALPINDI versus AL-MEHDI INTERNATIONAL
Sections 13 (1), 62 and 136 of the Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001) were assessed under Section 239 and 210 of the High Court reference taxpayer under section 62 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979, followed by section 13 (1) of the Ordinance. (A) was increased under. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal considered the increase in taxpayer income as invalid because the approval of the Additional Commission (IAC) inspecting under section 13 (1) of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 was not properly obtained. The question before the High Court was whether the IAC approval was permissible because the taxation officer obtained the powers of the Commissioner under Section 239 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, under the Welfare of the Tax Officer under Section 13. IAC approval was sought. The Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, meant that the tax was further reviewed by a senior in the position of tax officer so that more informed and preferential e-tax ordinance was assessed before allowing the addition under section 13 of 1979. And the tax officer in this case was not solely dependent on the discretion of the junior, even by the delegation, if he was enjoying, the powers of the commissioner, the high officer under the law, to obtain approval from the IAC However, if the tax officer was a commissioner himself, then the situation would change, as it would then have to get approval from the IAC. Would be tantamount to approval. A junior officer of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 shall be deemed redundant in the new scheme of things under section 13 (1) of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 and, in the face of it by the Commissioner himself, this assessment shall be effectively canceled. ? Section 239 (2) of the New Income Tax Ordinance 2001
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2013
