Find a Lawyer

SYED MUHAMMAD AHMAD NAQVI, PROPRIETOR versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD

Establishment of Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (2000 XXV) of CBR Circular No. 2 of 1998, Sections 50 and 59 (1) 1998, Section 2 (3) Tax Reduction Source Cell Assessment Income which was accepted under the Self Assessment Scheme. But under Section 50 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, the credit for deductions was allowed to the extent of the tax payable on the declared income and it was claimed that the department claimed for the deduction claim. Diagnosis was completed due to copy. Inquiries regarding timely filing of original returns were restricted to tax liability only because no real invoice was associated with the claim for deduction withdrawal under section 50 (4) of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 and The assumption is not covered by the tax regime, requires careful scrutiny. The exact return date was not yet known, nor was anyone shown in the Department of Complaints. There was no explanation for any reduction or reduction in which the Assessing Officer and the Regional Commissioner of Income The tax was told that it does not offer any plausible explanation for allowing the credit to be deducted to the extent of the tax liability without any justification whatsoever. Department officials should not be allowed to suffer for negligence, negligence and ineligibility Neglect, negligence, delay, disqualification, disqualification, and ineligibility to exclude facts and obligations by the relevant federal tax source. Recommended that a complaint about deduction allowance under Section 50 of the Central Board of Income Tax Ordinance 1979 jobs for advocates from Feroz Watan lawyer