Find a Lawyer

I.T.A. NO.61/KB AND M.A. (COND.) NO.22/KB OF 2002, DECIDED ON 19TH APRIL, 2003. versus I.T.A. NO.61/KB AND M.A. (COND.) NO.22/KB OF 2002, DECIDED ON 19TH APRIL, 2003.

Sections 59 (1) and 13 (1) (a) of CBR Circular No. 9 of 1998, dated 21 7 1998 (Self Assessment Scheme 1998 99), Para 2 (h) withdrawal from the scope of the Self Assessment Scheme on the land. The appellate authority, which had earlier estimated the stock to be over the limit during the raid, canceled on the basis that there was no positive and definitive evidence for the department's assessment of additional stock on the basis of the raid. do not have. No notice was issued for the reason of dismissal of the charge of the Self Assessment Scheme and accordingly the Assessment Officer was required to accept the return of income under Section 59 (1) of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 Was instructed. Based on the physical inventory of the goods available in the business premises, the stock was found within just a few hours, which varied the stock discovered by the department and the capital discovered. The Income Tax Ordinance was given to obtain a tax amnesty scheme in determining the final taxable income from unknown sources to be included under section 13 (1) (AA) of 1979 because it was unclear why Why should not the affirmative evidence be taken to cover the statement of the stock of the stock, as the first appellate authority did not transfer the matter and summarized the opinion that the determination of the stock by the raiding party was a simple information. Not that the evidence was not deemed to be valid in connection with the notice of inquiry because the lawsuit was prosecuted under common law. The appropriate showcase notice was delivered, the order was canceled due to a misinterpretation of the law and the acceptance of the return filed under the Self Assessment best law firm from Pasni lawyer