Find a Lawyer

I.T.AS. NOS.5306/LB TO 5308/LB OF 2002, DECIDED ON 28TH FEBRUARY 2005. versus I.T.AS. NOS.5306/LB TO 5308/LB OF 2002, DECIDED ON 28TH FEBRUARY 2005.

The First Appellate Authority, which failed to deduct or pay tax liability of Section 52, hereby canceled the orders approved under section 52 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979, three separate assessments under section 52 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979. Orders were issued. Passing an order under section 52 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979, the transaction falls within the relevant period of the assessment year, which was not lawful. , Dated 20, 1998, asserted that the assessee was liable under section 52 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, but did not confirm the exact amount for which the assessee was charged under section 52 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 Order. Was declared liable, the date 28 2000 reviewed the transaction of the Assisi which the Assisi had deducted in tax, which was not deposited in the treasury and was on section 52 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 dated 12 5, 2001 Unlawfully retained under the order, the Assigning Officer acknowledged the balance of the total deduction deducted by the Assisi and was deposited in the Treasury. Was not addressed but retained. There was no doubt that the Assisi had sought to relinquish its clear and uncontested obligations under the law by resorting to unauthorized techniques that were not submitted to the tax treasury deducted by this assessment. No, the Siding Officer did not verify the exact amount of tax levied under S: 52. In the first order of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, the SCCC had not yet deposited this amount in the Treasury, as such was patent and clearly illegal, which was assessed in this case and thereby led to the issue. This family advocate from Bajaur lawyer