Find a Lawyer

NEW BISMILLAH AUTOS, FAISALABAD versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD

Notice of Submission of Sections 9 and 11 to the Office of the Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXXV of 2000), Sections 56 and 61 of the Income Tax Ordinance of 2001 (Sections 9 and 11, 3 years), in the application of the SC That there was no business. In 2000, the Assessing Officer made between 2000 and 2000 accepted, which gave him an income tax invoice of Rs 550 for the year 2001 2002, after which he submitted the next date by the Assessing Officer, followed by non-compliance. For all 3 years the stability review order was issued. The taxpayer upon review of such notice did not refuse to submit such challan to the Assessing Officer, containing the taxpayer's appearance and his tax number, stamp and preliminary mark of the concerned officer, 6000 and on hire. Had submitted the certificate from the respective bank. Contracts for the hiring of business premises, but these examiners were not available on record to test the assessed income by issuing invoices for 2001 to 2002 giving the impression that any demand from the year 2000 The tax was not made and the tax deduction cannot be explained in 2001 and 2002, why after issuing such invoice, the review creates a demand that the entire action was taken by the officer examined for 3 years and this Due to legal and diagnostic fraud, as well as baseless, misuse of power and natural justice. Revenue was recommended to the Federal Tax Ombudsman for violating its principles. Cancellation of unclean diagnosis under section 122A of Income Tax Ordinance 2001 and new assessment after investigation and hearing lawer from fb area from Bewal lawyer