Find a Lawyer

versus

Section 13 (1) (a) is included on the basis of the report of the Additional Inspection Inspector who completed the showroom / shop on 30-6 1998. Accuracy inspectors report that no definitive information was brought to the record that the showroom / shopping was completed on 30 6, 1998, not a single piece of documentary evidence was submitted by the inspector while the SC approved. The copy of the agreement signed between the Contractor and the Contractor Valuation Certificate given by the Architect, was not confirmed, up to 30%. 1998, only the Foundation's work was done, nothing was contested except the Sketch Inspector's report, which was the basis of action under section 13 (1) (d) of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979. Went, nothing had this diagnosis. Under Section 13 (1) (d) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, the officer acting was found to have failed to diagnose an incomplete showroom / shop. In the presence of solid documentary evidence without documentary evidence, it was not further confirmed if his position was confirmed, the first appellate authority rightly dismissing this addition with the observation that The Assessing Officer failed to disclose the exact information on which it was believed that the Assessment had completed the showroom / shopping by 30 6, 1998 except that the Income Tax Inspector had the first appellate authority. This finding report was confirmed by the appellate tribunal. \ r \ n inheritance advocates near Panjgur lawyer