Find a Lawyer

I.T.AS. NOS.2044/KB AND 2045/KB OF 19-95-96, DECIDED ON 28TH AUGUST, 2002. versus I.T.AS. NOS.2044/KB AND 2045/KB OF 19-95-96, DECIDED ON 28TH AUGUST, 2002.

Income Tax Ordinance 1979 Section 111 Disagrees With Covering Income Tax The First Appellate Authority has affirmed that the penalty imposed was signed by a competent representative of the competent authority while the Assisi argued that it had Never agreed to impose. Words of fines and penalties were written by the Assessing Officer on his back and without his consent no penalty could be imposed under Section 111 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979, Section 116 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979, There should be clearly a clause in section 111 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 that made it clear that the Deputy Commissioner had to be satisfied that the same income in the case of any assessment in the proceedings before or before the proceedings, the income should be The hiding and such satisfying thing happened was checking the arts approved under section 62 of the Income Tax Ordinance Household, should be about Friendly clearly indicate that the assessment process assessment order passed when the end result is thriving. In 1979 it was found that these orders were not stated in the order relating to the intention of the Assessing Officer to initiate the penalty proceedings under Section 116 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, the condition of the penalty which was not imposed. That was done. online advocate from Diamer lawyer