Find a Lawyer

MESSRS PAKSAUDI FERTILIZERS LIMITED versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

Sections 50 (4), 80 C, 136, 143 B&S Schedule, Part IV, CL (9) Sales of Goods Act (III of 1930), Sections 4 (1) and 5 (1) of the Contract Act (1872) IX)), claims the manufacturing company's payment of advance income tax deduction by the marketing company on the payment of the manufacturing company's product distribution and marketing contract to the manufacturing company after the purchase of the section 182, 211, 222 and 223 manufacturing company. Will be subjected to Section 80C of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, the appellate tribunal dismissed this claim because no provision was disclosed under section 50 (4) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, the decision of the Tribunal was valid. , Was not the manufacturing company entitled to the benefits of Section 80C? Such an exercise of the ordinance regarding such deductions from the payments made by the marketing company shall include the interpretation of the agreement between the parties, which is a question of law. The Court of Appeal raised questions of law as determined by the tribunal agreement, including the direct purchase of the manufacturing company's products by the marketing company, and all the necessary elements of a similar agency agreement between the parties. Such contract was deemed to have disappeared in the sale of the manufacturing company's product sales to the deducting company Advance Tax under section 50 (4) of the ordinance after payment by the marketing company, its section 80C to the manufacturing company. Will be able to claim benefits of the High Court for a controversial year S appeal accepted, and set aside for victims. Order jobs for advocates from Gujar Khan lawyer