Find a Lawyer

I.T.A. NO. 994/LB OF 2004, DECIDED ON 22ND JULY, 2006. versus I.T.A. NO. 994/LB OF 2004, DECIDED ON 22ND JULY, 2006.

All details were prepared with the books of accounts of section, I, & 86 and persons tax ()) liability for tax deduction or payment failures, a limited company which has complete account books. Taxing officer proceeded to make an assessment under section 22 and and under 86 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, without identifying any defects in the books of accounts or deducting tax deductions on purchases by the Assisi First Appellate Authority. Without identifying, the assessment was set aside with the observation that all taxes were summarized had gone. Payments under Head Stores and Spares and Repair and Evaluation Officer did not examine the records honestly because it was not possible that all payments under Head Stores and Spares received the attention of Section 50 (4) of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979. Maybe. Assessment Officer failed to identify any payment that would be considered in the scope of section 50 (4) of the C Income Tax Ordinance 1979, which produced the entire books of the accuracy assessment account that were entered in the assessment order. Where the tax deduction should have been deducted on the assessment of the source, it was decided by the observing officer that the assessing officer did not examine the record honestly and that all payments under the headquarters and the Spears were subject to section 50 of the Income Tax Ordinance. (4), the 1979 case should not be remanded as usual because This allowed the assessing officer to meet his shortcomings when books of accounts were available with the Assessment. Officer, this when you need a advocate from Kabir Wala lawyer