Find a Lawyer

I.T.AS. NOS.141/LB AND 142/LB OF 2006, DECIDED ON 25TH FEBRUARY, 2006. versus I.T.AS. NOS.141/LB AND 142/LB OF 2006, DECIDED ON 25TH FEBRUARY, 2006.

Sections 153 (1) (C), 153 (6) and 115 (4) CBR Circular No. 1 2005, CBR Circular No. 11 of 2005 5, 2005 30 199 1991 Payments for goods and services No need to submit to the Income Tax Returning Officer instead of reviewing the contractor's claim, the filing officer, instead of filing a return, observed that on payment in the form of carriage contractors. The tax deduction is a complete and final discharge of the tax liability and the claim for a refund cannot be entertained. According to CBR Circular No. 1 of the Assessing Officer 2005, to effect tax deduction, withholding tax was adjusted on all types of services in the date of 2005 and claimed as refund. It was directed that, while accepting the SC's appeal, the appellate authority had fully justified their action, the Appellate Tribunal upheld their view that the Assessing Officer was unlawful while deducting taxes. Reject the refund claim by presenting in full and in full. The first appellate authority had rightly granted the absence of tax liability, which did not guarantee any interference; the appellate tribunals were dismissed because of the lack of legal substance. pakistani advocates Rajana lawyer