Find a Lawyer

NEW HAJI WARIS & CO versus SECRETARY REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD

The establishment of the Office of Sections 89, 63/66A and 61 Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXXV of 2000) was made for de novo proceeding in advance, subject to fresh notice under section 61 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979. The notice was compared by means of which additional tax was levied on the alleged default on non-payment of tax demand while the non-payment of tax demand created against the penalty order of such inquiry. Nevertheless, the date of 30 2003 2003 (submitted on 13 1 2004) is alleged to have been issued at a time when the assessment was already erected and Thus, the default on which the default penalty was imposed under section 89 of the Income Tax Ordinance was resolved in 1979, to the extent the exclusion of tax and additional tax demand was resolved but the amount of serious misconduct included There was evidence of misconduct by passing an earlier history order. Signature of these documents by people who made paralyzed comments, and by those who carefully scrutinized the records without carefully scrutinizing the Federal Tax Ombudsman in writing. Were to inquire into the identity of those who passed a requisite fine order. It was intended to be 30 2003 2003 and issued notice on this basis. For the Regional Commissioner of Income Tax, those who partially prepare comments should be identified by name and warned to be cautious, and to be cautious in the draft report to the Central Board of Revenue Federal Tax Ombudsman Affect Regional Tax Commissioners of Income Tax power of attorney advocate Bagh lawyer