Find a Lawyer

ABDUL BASIT versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD

Sections 170, 171, 124A and 132 (10) of the Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979), Section 80C and 59A Workers \ Welfare Fund Ordinance (XXXVI of 1971), Section 4 of the Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXXV of 2000) Establishment, Section 2 ()) Withholding of Return of Workers - The issue has been interpreted by the Appellate Tribunal through the Appellate Tribunal and the law by the High Court where it has been ordered that the taxpayers Who were likely subject to the tax regime. Workers were not liable to pay / Welfare Fund had the highest decision before the Supreme Court could appeal against the High Court decision or appeal against the Appellate Tribunal order, income tax The deviation from the provisions of section 132 (10) of the Ordinance 2001, which ultimately affirms the decision of the appellate tribunal until it was overturned by the High Court, had no interim injunction. Was that the Income Tax Ordinance, since 2001, when Section 124A specifically stated that the Income Tax Order, despite the appeal under the Higher Law Ordinance was incorporated in 2001, will not be issued a refund under the Income Tax Order 1770. The tax ordinance, 2001 as well as the additional payment under section 171, was clearly contemplated by law and corruption as described in section 2 (3) of the Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance Office of the Establishment, 2000 federal tax. The Ombudsman recommended that the additional payment for the return of the Workers' Welfare Fund as well as the return from late 1991 to 2001 to 2001 2002 be issued with immediate r \ n. online advocate from Chawinda lawyer