Find a Lawyer

NOS.264/LB, 265/LB AND 266/LB OF 2003 versus NOS.264/LB, 265/LB AND 266/LB OF 2003

Referring to the High Court's jurisdiction for reduction of sections 133 and 190 fines, the question in this case was whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal had sought to reduce the penalty under Section 108 (b) (i) of the Income Tax Commissioner. What justified the keeping of the order? ) The requirement of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 was that where there was no "reasonable cause" for default, the penalty should be determined at fixed rates and not reduced by any forum. Can \ Reduce \, ify amend the Sections 129 and 132 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1 979 and 97 without the meaning of Remand 9, 199 it cannot be said that the power to reduce penalties is particularly The officer was not available, but the appellate authorities (appeals), including the Income Tax Commissioner, or anyone else in the Income Tax Department's organizational structure, kept in view the circumstances of each case. While there was full power to reduce taxes or penalties, there was no prejudice in the Revenue Reference for such questions as the taxpayer and the delay in filing the returns. In the circumstances, the High Court was not cited as merely educational. family advocate from Lakimarwat lawyer