Find a Lawyer

SHAHKOT FLOUR AND GENERAL MILLS (PVT.) LTD., FAISALABAD ROAD, SHAHKOT versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 10, COMPANY ZONE-I, LAHORE

Section 14 (1), 66A, 136 (2) and Second Schedule Total (118D) Order of Appeal Testing, while reviewing the tax exemption for a specific period, Prof. Ascii completed the second schedule of the Income Tax Ordinance (118). D), claiming exemption under section 66A of the 1979 Income Tax Ordinance 1979, the documentary evidence produced by the Assistant Commissioner was not entered into, and for the reviewer to be exempt Not eligible, was amended under section 66A of the Income Tax. By examining the accuracy of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, the Ordinance, which began proceeding under Section 66A of the Income Tax Appellate Ordinance 1979, was maintained in 1979, and relied solely on documentary evidence Direct or indirect assimilation was associated with the affairs of the company. No acceptable explanation was presented in the law due to the fact that the record shows that the Assessing Officer failed to carry out the required investigation under Section 62 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 while preparing the officer and the reviewer There was no need to establish your claim for exemption from the Rising Authority; accordingly, it was justified with reference to the facts and documents in the record that this asset was in fact a fact. An existing move and an attempt was made to rename it only; the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal did not raise any question of law seeking an answer by the High Court. This review can be excluded with respect to any factual question in the case. best advocate from FR Bannu / Lakki lawyer