Find a Lawyer

I.T.AS. NOS.2738/KB AND 2764/KB OF 1993-94, DECIDED ON 31ST JANUARY, 2001 versus I.T.AS. NOS.2738/KB AND 2764/KB OF 1993-94, DECIDED ON 31ST JANUARY, 2001

Section 23 (1) (viii) (b) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969), Section 30 (4) and 54 Sindh Industrial Relations Rules, 1973, R69 bonus paid up to 60%, in compliance with The provisions of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, were deemed inappropriate by the Assessing Officer and allowed the bonus up to 30% profit and did not justify half of the claim permit, bonus claim was not allowed for both. ? Under section 30 (4) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, according to the terms of the contract with the collective bargaining agent (CBA), factory workers and office employees are required to comply with Sindh Industrial Relations Rules, 1973 Read, under Section 454 of the Payment Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, was fined and imprisoned for failure to pay. This means that failure to pay would result in failure. n The closure of the business due to the labor strike in relation to the bonus with profit, the three conditions listed in section 23 (1) (viii) (b) of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 were consolidated and were to be considered a. Together, the profit was a profit that, without the charge of depreciation and bonus payment, the payment of the bonus without reference to the profit was an acceptable expense, as the Issuer had no option in connection with the payment of that bonus. And it was the whole expense. The bonus payment was made solely in accordance with the Company's past practice for business purposes and was granted full approval in the previous estimation years; the Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal. property advocate from Umer Kot lawyer