Find a Lawyer

DATA ELECTRONICS (PVT.) LTD., LAHORE versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN

The decision in the appeals of sections 129 (5) (6) and (7) of the Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Articles 199 5 9 129 (5) (6) and 7, Income Tax Ordinance 2001, was essentially a notice format benefit Was suggested under 5 under. 129 (5), Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 when addressing a letter of the Assisi to make a commissioner through a competent representative of the rightful, requesting for a speedy hearing of the appeal 13 132 (6), of the Income. The provisions mentioned were the Tax Ordinance, 1979 (S \ 129 (5) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001), which was sufficient to warn the Commissioner that within the next 30 days the law was to be ignored or the consequences would be met. Will In addition, for the benefits conferred under the provisions of Section 129 (5), the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 was presented in the circumstances that the Department held that the letter was in accordance with the procedure set out for filing the appeal. Had to direct. Otherwise, such a letter had no notice of the law and, given that the letter was given directly to the Commissioner, he may not have studied it and did not particularly understand its implications, when the letter was heading. If the word carry notice was not correct, what should be the format? The notice was not answered by the Income Tax Ordinance; the law of 2001 requires that if a notice is easily understood in a reasonable language, it can easily warn if it does not carry out such an investigation. And the fact that the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 was unstable. By suggesting any such sample and going through the letter itself, it can be concluded that it had sufficiently informed the reviewer's intention against the aid, where he was required by the commissioner Failure to comply with ask a advocate free from Hariwala lawyer