Find a Lawyer

I.T.AS. NOS. 1360/KB OF 1999-2000 AND 2057/KB OF 2002, DECIDED ON 11TH JANUARY, 2003. versus I.T.AS. NOS. 1360/KB OF 1999-2000 AND 2057/KB OF 2002, DECIDED ON 11TH JANUARY, 2003.

Section 66A, 13 (1) (d) and 59A Stamp Act (II of 1899), inspecting deputy commissioner's inspection under section 59 powers of inspection of additional commissioner under section 59A of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 Were done. The Additional Commissioner, who inspected the stampede Registrar of Fixed Price on the registered sale deed of the acquired property, canceled the order on the basis that the Assessing Officer had accepted the declared value of the property but vice versa. When it was ridiculously low. Pricing was required on the basis of the collector's rates and a corrective order approved by the Assessing Officer under Section 59A of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979, instructing them to take appropriate steps for the recovery of loss from income through de novo action. Was done And based on the scrutiny of whatever was available on the issuance of the record letter, the revenue-interest-based investigating officer disclosed his intention to proceed under the general law and declared the property as a copy of the Convention Deed. The assessment looks ridiculously low if the order of the Additional Commissioner inspecting the collector's rates was appropriate, considering whether it was due to prejudice revenue and inspecting the Additional Commissioner in these views. It was, in fact, by the Additional Commissioner inspecting the section 66A of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 This order was wrong and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue Order. It was upheld by the appellate tribunal immigration advocates email from Shedani sharif lawyer