Find a Lawyer

I.T.A. NO. 2840/LB OF 2004, DECIDED ON 1ST MAY, 2006. versus I.T.A. NO. 2840/LB OF 2004, DECIDED ON 1ST MAY, 2006.

Section 80D and Schedule II: Part I, CLS 115A, 115C, Part IV, CL 123 Income Tax Ordinance (XXL of 2001), Section 221, Schedule II: Part I, CL 106A and Part IV, Total 11 (xvi) Companies Ordinance (XLVII of 1984), Sections 15, 32, 33, 183, 178 and 205 of the Finance Act (VII of 2005), Proposal Secretary RO 169 (I) / 1998 Section R Minimum tax on O 567 (I) / 99 Some people's income was registered as a limited company and was sponsored by WAPDA with the expectation of completion of the corporation (privatization) process prior to privatization. Assessment income included in the return and Wapda revenue During the Asset Transit Period, Income Tax and Minimum Tax Waiver were allowed for three years Company / Assisi Privatization was not completed in the expected period of the Department of Income 80D at the expiry of three years. The underwriting proceedings and the Minimum Taxes Tax Ordinance, which was imposed on the Assisi company in 1979, indicate that for and on behalf of WAPDA. That the directors / shareholders were designated under section 183 of the Companies Ordinance 1984 and had no interest in profit and no liability for loss of company. That the directors had no option to move freely but they were obliged to comply with all the orders of WAPDA and since the assessee was doing everything for the return and on behalf of the company there was minimal tax on the business. The imposition was to tax Wapda business. Which was not the purpose of law enforcement, Wapda was the original owner of the Essex company because all the directors, including the company's chairman, were employees of Wapda. Purchase of electricity list of supreme court advocates from Hayatabad lawyer