Find a Lawyer

I.T.AS. NOS. 697/LB TO 700/LB, 1591/LB AND 1592/LB OF 2001, DECIDED ON 24TH FEBRUARY, 2005. versus I.T.AS. NOS. 697/LB TO 700/LB, 1591/LB AND 1592/LB OF 2001, DECIDED ON 24TH FEBRUARY, 2005.

A Notice of Additional Assessment Restriction was issued under Section 62 of Section 65 (3A) and 62 Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, 23 assessment 2000, in which a nine-page response notice was delivered on June 30, 2000 at 10pm. The deadline for completing the additional assessment was on July 1, 2000, when the evaluator personally requested for a copy of the assessment order on July 3, 2000, in addition to requesting a file inspection, the order sheet A copy of the petition was also sought which was rejected by the Assisi. It was positive to understand and to understand that no order was passed within the time limit specified in section 65 (3A) of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979, This right was collected in connection with the entitled assessment, which was made after the expiry of the limitation period, and this order was approved after the refusal to provide a copy of such assessment order, as was the case on 7th 2000. And to show the same it was designed to pass under the procedure of the Civil Procedure Code under the accuracy of the Diagnostic Officer, to declare 30 30 6 2000 have 2000 have a short order of 1908 What was to be done, on that day, was the culmination of a trial proceeding while the legislature in financial laws did not adopt such a procedure in its strategy. It was for this reason that financial laws generally impose a duty on a citizen that requires serious consideration if the assessing officer had passed the order under section 65 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979. So it would have been very comfortable to appeal. The court shall declare such order passed without legal jurisdiction. This is not the case for Assisi online advocate from Pak Pattan Sharif lawyer