Find a Lawyer

I.T.AS. NOS.331/IB AND 406/IB OF 2001-2002, DECIDED ON 8TH MARCH 2003 versus I.T.AS. NOS.331/IB AND 406/IB OF 2001-2002, DECIDED ON 8TH MARCH 2003

Section 24 (ff), 24 (c) and 50 (7b) of CBR Circular No. 6 1990 dated 15 7 1990 cannot be accepted so claim in respect of premises rent is not allowed. Was given The payment was not made through cross-check and was not allowed under section 24 (ff) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, the Assisi claimed that sections 24 (c) and 24 (ff) of the Income Tax Ordinance. ) Covers the payment of rent for a home property. , 1979 Since section 24 (c) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 did not require payment by cross check, it was more beneficial to the assessee and should have been applied and the landlord was already Had already paid tax on rent. Section 24 (c) of the accuracy of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 was applicable only to such rent of a property on which the services of the Government were obtained. Etc., which was responsible for payment, was to be deducted in advance tax. Payment of rent since the SC did not fall in any of the kits was not attracted by the argument of the tax withholding agent as specified in section 50 (7B) of section 24 (c) of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 that the provisions of section 24 of this case It was covered together by the provisions of (C) and 24 (FF). Income tax ordinance, 1979 was incorrect The beneficial interpretation of the law was not relevant The behavior offered by the Assessing Officer was valid in law. Appellate Tribunal Assistant has to pay rent through cross check as per law after confirming the order of the appellate authority. ? Included in section 24 (ff) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 and such rent / payment is both. online advocate from Usta Mohammad lawyer