Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD YOUNIS KHAN versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD

Section 13 (1) (d) and 58 (2) constitutes the Office of the Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (2000 XXV), section 2 (3) unclear investments, etc., are considered income, wealth statement Modified, investment sources were further enhanced by adopting a revised, defined declaration of real estate for real estate where the reviewing officer discovers whether to invest or to add valuable articles. The amount spent on the acquisition of the account is more than the amount listed in the account or wealth statements, the surplus can only be made under section 13 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 if the Assissee declares There is no explanation as to the nature of the difference between the investments made and the source and the investment provided by the Assessing Officer will actually require the Assessing Officer, so check the source facts and the extent to which These properties can be invested in the modified value of the property statement in the other asset was irrelevant because if the source of the modified value is not specified then the value of the asset on the other hand has not been modified. It can still be added to the context of the revised price, no additions can be made. If the complainant / reviewer had any explanation for the value suggested by the Assessing Officer, then it was against the law, was irrational, irrational and invalid and was also on an irrelevant basis by the Federal Tax Ombudsman. It was suggested that this assessment be examined that year, 2001 2001, should be canceled under section 122A of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 and after giving the complainant an opportunity to be heard, property advocate from Nooriabad lawyer