Find a Lawyer

I.T.AS. NOS. 927/LB AND 928/LB OF 2001, DECIDED ON 30TH SEPTEMBER, 2002. versus I.T.AS. NOS. 927/LB AND 928/LB OF 2001, DECIDED ON 30TH SEPTEMBER, 2002.

Section 66A, 62, 50 (4), 50 (5), 80C, 143B & Second Schedule, Part IV, CL9, Circular No. 12 of Para 4 CBR 1991, Inspection of Additional Commissioner, 306 1991 Option was to import a material manufacturer reviewing the order of the Deputy Commissioner under section 143B of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979. It was claimed under the misconception of the law that similar statements to all importers / suppliers. Were also to be filed. The Assessment was finalized under section 62 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, which was inspected by the Additional Commissioner for grant of deduction under section 50 (4) and 50 (5) of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 Because these deductions have the full and final exemption of tax liability as acknowledged in the statement under section 143B of the Income Tax Ordinance and the statutory provisions of the 1979 Act were to be interpreted in substance and not the Income Tax Ordinance. Rm income could not be received under section 80C of 1979, did not consider filing a statement under section 143B of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 It may be that Assissee chose the assumption tax system in relation to supply. Para 4KCL (9) of the Second Schedule of Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, unless the assessee specifically mentions the fact in return for filing a statement under section 143B of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 Don't choose government. It will be of no importance and cannot be termed a wrong order, the Inspector Additional Commissioner was canceled and the Assessing Officer's Assessment Order was restored by the appellate tribunal. best law firm from Kala Bagh lawyer