COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/ WEALTH TAX, MULTAN ZONE versus MUHAMMAD RAFI, MEDICAL OFFICER, D.H.Q. KHANEWAL
Section 128 (5) and 133 Reference to the High Court Power of Commissioner (Appeal) for entertaining documentary material or evidence The notice of ex parte order which referred the effect to the question of law to the High Court was entered in the year 1998 99. Was. Asserting her income of Rs 2,52,000 but the Assessing Officer refused to allow the exemption claim because under the scheme, the Assisi was increased by 20% compared to the previous year's tax. Air taxes had to be paid and only the exemption from this could be obtained. While paying a tax of Rs 22,560 while he had paid the total tax of Rs 20,800 for the year 1998 99 as allegedly failing to participate, the ascension officer requested the appellate authority that the expiry date. Before he made his edits. The return and tax of Rs 24,827 were charged and submitted to the Return and Invoice Commissioner's Income Tax (CIT) office, which disputed as the Assessing Officer disputed that any such return. The CIT office was not transferred to the Local District Office First Appellate Authority, however, passing through a slip of confession filed by the SC, it was agreed that the returns were actually amended and a 20% increase. Tax was filed with. Immediately compared to the previous year, therefore, the SCCC was entitled to immunity The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal upheld the first appellate authority's ruling on the basis that the statement of confirmation slip and revised return filing officer was supported. Who confirmed the oath before the Natural Appellate Authority. About Recovery of CIT (A)
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
