Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ASIF versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD

Income Tax Ordinance 1979 Second Schedule Part III, CL1B (2) CBR Circular No. 16, 2000 dated 3 7000 (No. 15 (1) ITP / 2000 SEL, dated 3 7 2000) C.B. RL Letter No. 16 (1) ITP / 2000 SEL, dated 14 11 2000 Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance of Office (XXXV of 2000), Section 9 plus 50% tax on Government College teaching staff for primary teachers. In the context of the Central Board of Revenue Letter No. 16 (1) ITP / 2000 SEL, 50 percent of the exemption tax exemption tax was rejected by the teachers of the Elementary Teachers Training College, dated 14th 11,000. From the Accountant General of Punjab Addressed, wherein it was stated that the deduction of tax liability under sub-section (2) of section (2) of section (1B) of the Second Schedule of Income Tax Ordinance 1979 was not acceptable to the teachers of public institutions. ? Prior to the amendment of the Tax Ordinance, 1979, the Finance Ordinance, 2001 of the total (1B) of Part III of them, the Government Training and Research Institutes was held in 2001 to cover it, a circular benefit. The mandible was circular and did not suffer any illegal interference. However, the Legislature amended to clarify the suspicion that if there is no need to issue a letter of 12 12 2000, without any necessary reason or justification, that would lead to corruption, then from July 2000 For this period, additional tax was deducted from the complainant's salary. In June 2001, the Department of Non-Repatriation asserted that the complaint was banned over time, and the disputed facts created special circumstances, justifying the delayed concession, which was waived by the Federal Tax Ombudsman's objection. lawer from fb area from Khanqah Dogran lawyer