Find a Lawyer

I.T.AS. NOS.1271/KB TO 1273/KB OF 2005, DECIDED ON 17TH FEBRUARY, 2007. versus I.T.AS. NOS.1271/KB TO 1273/KB OF 2005, DECIDED ON 17TH FEBRUARY, 2007.

Sections 2 (41), 62 and 132 of the Income Tax Rules, 1982, R180, the return of the Income Tax Officer's total Income Order were declared illegal, unannounced and canceled, thereby approving the return filed by the Manager. And the first appellate authority accepted it. It appears that the Power of Attorney violates sub-rules (1) and (2) of section 2 (41) of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 and R190 of the Income Tax Rules 1982. It was not confirmed whether the existing returns were filed by the same manager before and after the return or any other First Appellate Authority did not specify a reason for establishing that the demand Inappropriate service was not provided to the note evaluator, which was necessary for the decision to issue a threshold. , Was ignored by the assessee for the result of non-filing of the return and the action taken under the law was not considered, recording the decision that no return was filed. Had to decide. It can be searched for results from non-submission of returns by taxis and other members of the association, rather than the demand for tax, which results in the tax demand rejecting the declared version and various additions. Are done. The association of individuals did not offer a refund. Disclaimer was a serious matter, since the law provides for stringent action and no time limit was provided for dealing with such a situation. The case must first be referred to the appellate authority for further investigation immigration advocates from Ukba lawyer