NISHAT (CHUNIAN) LTD. versus FEDERAL BOARD OF REVENUE
Intra Court Appeal Maintenance Word Process Scope Notice issued by the authorities under Sections 127, 161 and 205 of the Reform Ordinance (XII of 1972), Sections 3 (2) and (3), Sections 161 and 205 of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 Under the jurisdiction of the constitutional jurisdiction, the High Court was arrested before the trial, a single judge of the High Court rejected the petition filed by the review, which brought the machinery of law into motion and recognized the matter. Every move taken to do so was also included. Further progress, in the court or before a tribunal in which it was pending, was a comprehensive expression and included all possible action under the law until its decision was implemented, applying such a test. , The Division Bench of the High Court concluded that the notices had been suspended. Prior to the Single Judge of the High Court under Article 199 of the Constitution, there was a step for action and the law was applicable Appeal against the original order, therefore, the intra-court appeal was not eligible under section 3 of the Law Reform Ordinance 1972 Was excluded under the circumstances
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2015
