Find a Lawyer

I.T.AS. NOS. 680/LB TO 682/PB OF 2004, DECIDED ON 29TH MARCH, 2005. versus I.T.AS. NOS. 680/LB TO 682/PB OF 2004, DECIDED ON 29TH MARCH, 2005.

Second Schedule, Part IV, CL (FF) and Section Ex As Exemption Issue in March 1998 before the insertion of clause (6F) of Part IV of the Second Schedule of Income Tax Ordinance 1979 by the Privatization Commission. Purchased the property. The amount was disbursed by the government in addition to the call deposit from the period 1998 to 1612 1999, the date of which was specified in the aforesaid clause. Assisi requested that the investigation be funded by the aforesaid clause. Source not protected. The first appellate authority, assuming that the clause was filed through the Finance Act 1998, which was applied from 1 7 1998, while the appellant purchased the property, was the former asset of the appraisal. ? Prior to the date of enrollment of the said clause, the open auction and Assisi were not eligible to avail themselves of the validity clause (6F) of clause IV of Part IV of their schedule. The Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 was of a beneficial nature and thus beneficial entries and modifications where no specific date of operation was included, work in accordance with clause (clause 6F) of Part IV of the Second Schedule of the Income Tax Ordinance. Will do. , The purchase of any asset through a public auction in 1979 was exempt from inspection of the amount made up to 1999 to 1999 and no increase could be made under section 13 of the Income Tax Ordinance, before the date of the additional target in 1979. 16 investment The entire investment of 1999 was made by the Appellate Tribunal online advocate from Bhan Saeedabad lawyer