Find a Lawyer

I.T.AS. NOS.4011/LB AND 4012/LB OF 2005, DECIDED ON 18TH NOVEMBER, 2006. versus I.T.AS. NOS.4011/LB AND 4012/LB OF 2005, DECIDED ON 18TH NOVEMBER, 2006.

The Department of Sections 23, 22, 30 and 35 deducted that the First Appellate Authority set aside the Assessment by directing it to allow the claiming expenses as expenses of the expenditure under section 23 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979. That is, even though there was no business and the loss was without any justification against interest income due to expenses allowed under Section 23 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, the section of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 Under 22 and after removing the damage, no justification existed. Against the income under Section 30 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, the balance loss to be kept till next year is to be paid under Section 35 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, Assisi claimed that the Income Tax Ordinance of 1979 According to section 34, if the interest income was calculated as income from other sources and the expenses were incurred as a loss of income from the business, this business loss was adjusted against interest income. Will go Regarding accuracy, the first appellate authority separated the assessments along the direction of assessing interest income under section 30 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979, under income from other sources, as expenses for business expenses. It was claimed that the elimination of loss against income under section 23 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 and Section 30 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 of each year, and the loss under section 30 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 Withholding loss against income and the loss incurred thereon was provided for the next year under Section 35 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 law firms from Chak Jamal lawyer