Find a Lawyer

I.T.AS. NOS.209/KB AND 210/KB OF 2005, DECIDED ON 29TH APRIL, 2006. versus I.T.AS. NOS.209/KB AND 210/KB OF 2005, DECIDED ON 29TH APRIL, 2006.

Section 221 Income Tax Ordinance (XXI of 1979), Amendment of Rule 65 and 11 Error Correction of Order Approved by Appeal Tribunal and Setting aside by the First Appellate Authority in Appeal The essence of the law was the law. Such a partial aspect was missing in the orders under consideration which did not fall under the jurisdiction of the Additional Commissioner / Taxation Officer and the First Appellate Authority and the First Appellate Authority to intervene in matters relating to the decisions of the Appellate Tribunal. There were no legal options for The appellate tribunal had a material legal force, meaning that the legal statements were binding on the parties involved in the proceedings. There may be a possibility that the material legal force can be broken by the extent of rationality, ration materia, and ration timoris, which was not apparent in the present case. There were serious complaints of such gravity on the principles of the appellate tribunal found on the basis of breach of the rules or shortcomings of the breach, that such a judicial decision could not be further questioned after a particular point. Which was Additional Commissioner / Tax Officer and First Appellate Authority. The appellate tribunal is not obliged to interfere with the decision which, in addition to enjoying the material legal force and authority over the domain of facts, the orders passed by the two authorities below are without legal jurisdiction and excessive jurisdiction. Of the labor force and was not sustainable in the eyes of the law order. Dismissed by Appellate Tribunal approved by Additional Commissioner / Taxation Officer and First Appellate Authority \ r \ n \ r \ n advocate for immigration from Haripur lawyer