Find a Lawyer

ZAFAR FARHAT INDUSTRIES (PVT.) LTD., RAJANPUR versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD

Income Tax Ordinance 1979 Sections 96 and 50 Establishment of the Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXXV of 2000V), Section 2 (3) and 9 Investigations of Inappropriate Misconduct With Agents Preventing Source Tax Deductions Alleges that the department deliberately avoided giving up claim of full credit due to tax deducted from their income, their legitimate liability to delay the refund of the amount deducted from the department. It was reported that the balanced claim was unconfirmed and is verified from numerous DPCs and DPUs / Treasuries and as soon as the process begins. After the verification was completed, a refund will be issued to the complainant. Properly tackling property taxpayers with tax withholding agents did not, and frankly, ignore the fact that millions of rupees were deducted from textile mills and several states. Others were illegally retained in their own buses for the duration of the illegal retaining of government funds by agents stopping such an act at the expense of the public, in the present case four mills. Had only deducted Rs.44,365 from the complainant till 1997 as 98 and paid it to the Government Treasury after almost four years, on 8 2 2002 and even when the complainant had issued copies of the Treasury challan on them. When pressed, the complainant claimed to present a long list of other tax deduction agencies who deliberately sought money. The copy of the letter submitted by Assisi 3 to the Commissioner of Income-3 was written to him by the Commissioner of Income-tax, 2002, who made the complaint. ask a advocate free from Lakimarwat lawyer