Find a Lawyer

I.T.AS. NOS. 423/IB TO 429/IB OF 2002, DECIDED ON 17TH SEPTEMBER, 2003. versus I.T.AS. NOS. 423/IB TO 429/IB OF 2002, DECIDED ON 17TH SEPTEMBER, 2003.

Sections 13 (1) (AA), 59 (1), 59A, 61, 62, 63 and 65 Reopen the case assessment for the relevant assessment years, but later when information on some incorrect business and concealment details Were acquired. / Expenditure pressures received, the appraisal officer issued a show cause notice to review the reopening assessment under section 65 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 and forwarded the case to the Assistant Commissioner of Investigation so that he could reopen the assessment. Obtain a legal permit that was granted to the probation officer. With such permission, the former part of the assessment under section 63/65 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 was challenged to reopen the matter on the basis of the compulsory provision in section 65 (2) of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979. Was challenged, which required the approval of the investigating assistant commissioner. The case will be obtained for reopening, Assisi was not complied with, specifying the "permit" which stated that the assistant commissioner's investigation did not equate to approval by the investigating officer. There was a need to reopen the case, which was allowed between the words `permission 'and` approval' and `approval 'and` permission words' and their effects were quite different. In the present case, `permission' was allowed only. Went, the increase made by the Assessing Officer, after seeking permission, was not practicable in the eyes of the law, the Income Tax Ordinance of 1979 Reopen a case under section 65. The Assessing Officer was short of the required law and one of the Assessing Officer's actions was illegal and resulted in the removal of such defects. immigration advocates phone number from FR Kohat lawyer