Find a Lawyer

I.T.AS. NOS. 100(IB) TO 104(IB) OF 2001-2002, DECIDED ON 11TH JUNE, 2003. versus I.T.AS. NOS. 100(IB) TO 104(IB) OF 2001-2002, DECIDED ON 11TH JUNE, 2003.

Sections 52, 86, 50 (4), 80C and 143B Section RO 586 (1) / 91 Dated 30 6 1991 Section RO 828 (1) / 91 Dated 24 8 1991 Section RO 368 (1) / 94 , Dated 7 5 1994 CGR Letter No. 3 (7) SS (WHT) 98 99, dated 10 6 1999 In section 143B of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979, deducting or paying taxes The responsibility of those who fail. The Assisi filed was considered by default as Assisi - excluding the tax deduction on the purchase, excluding 15 lud in the amount of profit and 15 lud in direct labor cost from the receipt of the contract. The accuracy assessing officer fails to identify or specify the payment to the payee to the recipient on behalf of the assessee company which deducts the tax under section 50 (4) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 Was taxed under section 52 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979. Income Tax Ordinance Act of 1979 was different from section 62 of section 52 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979, whereby the Assessing Officer was required to determine the income and receive tax from Section 52 of the Income Tax Ordinance. Was charged under As it was not liable for the tax deduction in the Ordinance of Ordinance, the Assisi was required to perform the duty of the department as a wolting agent for which he was not paid or compensated in any way. Was given as an extra payer. For (tax deduction which was to be deposited in the Treasury after the monthly and yearly receipts of the tax) the tax is due to the supply of goods famous high court advocate from Chak Jhumra lawyer