Find a Lawyer

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KARACHI versus ABDUL GHANI

Sections 56, 65 65 and ?66 Re-review of the Inaccurate Supplement to Law The re-evaluation officer re-evaluated the previous estimate years and the case was finally decided by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. After the declaration, the decision was made on the basis of issuance of notice under section 566 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979, instead of section 556 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979, in exercise of powers under section 156 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 The order of amendment has been upheld by the Tribunal indicating the error of fact of the judgment of the court. Tdayy was not in order, so that in the absence of any fault on the record about the decision, the Tribunal should refuse to jurisdiction under section 1979 of the Income Tax Ordinance 156. Only one error in the exercise of such jurisdiction can be found on record by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal but in fact the Tribunal acted as an appeal forum against its own judgment, which was not sustainable in law. Failed and the appeal was dismissed without giving any legal justification, the High Court also failed to confirm the matter. Under section 156 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979, the petition filed an appeal / reference against the order / decision of the High Court. Trying to stop the law while avoiding doing so, but the High Court also lost that fact That a tribunal under the law can not sit on your decision / order until it appears on the record level of error can not be identified or floating High Court that not cause any prejudice law firms from Mehmood Kot lawyer