Find a Lawyer

REGIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LAHORE AND OTHERS versus MUHAMMAD YOUNAS MUGHAL AND 7 OTHERS

Article 212 (3) The decision to delay the application for leave to appeal was filed on the objection of the office on the last day of the failure to specify the delay of each day, and to confirm the attachment of the grounds of appeal. The copied copies were returned with the object. Nine days after the termination of the limitation service was filed before the Tribunal Petition, after the application was actually returned, the same will not be considered pending in the office of the Supreme Court, therefore, the ground copies are arranged by the applicant. Time just given. The appeal for which the petition was returned will not be excluded simply because the first time, the petition was filed within the application, for the first time the applicant, on the last date of the deadline and return, Without having applied, Taking the immediate steps to remove the time or defect, filed the same file with a delay of 9 days, the petitioner was required to specify a delay of every day from the date of filing of the petition till the date of filing but Did not provide any explanation for the circumstances under which the application could not be filed on the same day, nor could it take 9 days to file the same. The reason for the law is no question. The importance of the common people involved in this matter was to deny leave to appeal immigration advocates email from Jacobabad lawyer