Find a Lawyer

I.T.A. NO. 1713/KB OF 1996-97, DECIDED ON 28TH OCTOBER, 2002. versus I.T.A. NO. 1713/KB OF 1996-97, DECIDED ON 28TH OCTOBER, 2002.

The amount recovered in respect of deductions after Articles 25 (c), 23 and 22, etc. In addition, there was no business and a return was filed stating the loss of financial expenses, which was not allowed by the appraising officer, which was earlier confirmed by the appellate authority as it was not in any business. Section 25 (c) of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 included unpaid liabilities as income during the last three years and, for this purpose, claimed that the business was subject to accrual. The responsibilities are not allowed. In previous years, the deduction was not liable to be included under section 25 (c) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, the first appellate authority instructing the appraisal officer to deduct the amount in the liability category from pre-approved income. Can't exclude Under Section 25 (c) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, the balance was retained, the loss of business of the previous year was not allowed. The Income Tax Ordinance was moved against this increase under section 25 (c) of 1979. Because any business losses in the first years cannot be brought forward and cannot be adjusted against this increase under Section 25 (c). In order to increase the accuracy of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, for the purpose of such an increase, it was supplied with reference to Section 22 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 that it would be assumed that during this year, this business was carried out by Assisi. The appellate authority was, at first, justified in discharging its obligation, but under section 23 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979, section 25 of the Income Tax Ordinance Pakistan, top advocate family court from Khushab lawyer