Find a Lawyer

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX/WEALTH TAX, COMPANIES ZONE, FAISALABAD versus ASIM TEXTILES MILLS LIMITED, FAISALABAD

Sections 108 (b), 139 [as amended by the Finance Act (amended 1995)], 144 and 165 Income Tax Rules, 1982, R53 [as amended by section R1111 (I) / 95 , 23 11 1995 and Section RO 1050 (I) / 98, dated 13 10 1998] In the CBR Circular No. 4 of 1995, dated 97. The income received from the salary in 1995 was stated in the Income Tax Rules 1982 R53. Not imposing due date, section 108 (fine imposed under section B) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, which was removed by the appellant and tribunal for breach of such legal obligation by the assessee. The theory of the accuracy tribunal is not correct That in the absence of a specific date in section 139, seek information, particulars and statements made under Section 144 of the Ordinance under Section 139 of the Ordinance, and the opinion of the Ordinance Tribunal already pursuant to Section 108 (b) Under the reviewer can be punished, it is wrong that the penal provisions were enforceable only when an individual failed to present without reasonable cause. The statement or information is allowed within this purpose within time, and since no time was set for the submission of salary statements in section 139 of the Ordinance, such provisions were made under section 139 under section 1365. The rules will be read with the powers of the Central Board of Revenue for making rules. There is a fixed term delivery option for creating rules and entering statements that consider them. The fact is that no specific clause was mentioned in the rules, under which a particular function was no longer compatible with such a requirement, when, however, the supply itself identified a particular principle. top advocates from Mamu kunjan lawyer