Find a Lawyer

MIAN ABDUL KARIM versus SECRETARY REVENUE DIVISION ISLAMABAD

Section 2 (3) Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 (XII ISI), Third Schedule: R 7 Corruption Appeal not to issue appeal decision by First Appellate Authority even after 2/3 time hearing The bar was heard but no decision was made. The grounds were shown or were being heard repeatedly and the decision of the appeal was not to be decided until it was transferred, which is evidence of incompetence, negligence and negligence in the payment of the official duties. The matters were not transferred even after the change of jurisdiction. Because the hearing was over and the verdict was to be made. Wherever any party pleads in good faith it is necessary to state the facts and reasons so that for any reason whatever negligence in performing the duties cannot be said with good faith, but still There is no compelling reason to delay the decision. The Federal Tax Ombudsman R was set up under the Income Tax Commissioner (Appeals), leading to repeated hearings. Suggested that the Central Board of Revenue instruct the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to resolve the appeal filed by the complainant / reviewer within 30 days. The Central Board of Revenue Commissioner will issue a warning letter to the Income Tax (Appeal) Bahawalpur so that they will be vigilant in performing their duties. The statement of Commissioner Income Tax (Appeal) Multan, who has heard the appeals twice and did not approve the order, should be called and necessary action should be taken and the Central Board of Revenue should consider issuing instructions when the jurisdiction of the appellants. If moved, the appeals in which the arguments are completed by the parties and the decision online advocate from Pir Mahal lawyer