Find a Lawyer

I.T.AS. NOS. 3249/LB TO 3254/LB OF 2002, DECIDED ON 18TH MAY, 2002. versus I.T.AS. NOS. 3249/LB TO 3254/LB OF 2002, DECIDED ON 18TH MAY, 2002.

Income Tax Ordinance 1979 Sections 154, 59 (A) / 59 (1), 61 and 66A Service of Notice First Appellate Authority acknowledged that the notice was not properly presented under section 61 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 and No reasonable hearing opportunity was provided. To check that there was no receipt on record to prove that the notices were actually sent by registered post, despite the fact that the words of the registered post were written on copies of the notice office. And the assessment was set aside. Instead of canceling orders for non-evaluation of a legal notice, they will first be rejected by the Appellate Authority. The legal appeal authority did not have the justification to set aside the case after witnessing such infringement. Against the law and since the same case the probation proceedings by the Assessing Officer were required to be canceled, the absence of proper service of notice was decided on a legal basis, the Appellate Tribunal had considered the merits of the matter. Prior to which the order approved by the appellate authority was vacated and the Assisting Officer was canceled by the Appellate Tribunal Assessing Officer. Instruction to accept the declared version of Assisi advocate from Gujranwala lawyer