Find a Lawyer

AKMAL HUSSAIN versus CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB

The Punjab Removal Service (Special Powers) Act against the imposition of penalties on the appellant withholding sections 3 and 10 was taken under the Ordinance 2000 and it was given a show cause notice alleging that the Excise and Taxation Officer He was found unresponsive while working as a businessman. During the relevant financial year, the property tax was not able to obtain the full demand for recovery including the response to show the notice given by the appellant through the arrears which was not considered satisfactory by the Authority. He was punished for stopping the development work. The alleged ineligibility was acknowledged by the fact-finding authority that it was estimated that the demand for recovery of the appellant in the area where the appellant was posted was unrealistic and therefore did not yield recovery targets. Could have been and the demand was substantially reduced as such fact supported the appellant's contention that he had already brought the situation. People generally pay property taxes at the end of the financial year, unless the relevant authority notes, but with no action taken, and the recovery speed is slower in the previous months and based on stats during those months, Achieving the associated goals can not be factually estimated, considering all the relevant facts. The appeal was accepted and a fine was ordered to stop the development famous high court advocate from Abdul Hakim lawyer