MUHAMMAD SHARIF ZARGAR, GUJRANWALA versus C.I.R. (APPEALS), GUJRANWALA
Section & 65 & Additional Additional Uncertainty Information Uncertainty of Bank Deposit Sales Negative Indication Not Removed Taxpayers claimed that the assessment was reopened on the basis of bank account recovery, however, At the end of the diagnostic officer could not be attracted negative indication of the bank's reserves; and failing to draw any negative direction, the appraisal officer resorted to the sale estimate as the Assessing Officer observed in his order that Deposits are concerned with no negative indication taken and under Section 13 of the Income Tax No action is being taken. The ordinance, 1979, that in the absence of any negative critique on the basis of reopening, the diagnostic officer should have left rather than proceeded. And that the notices were not legally issued under section 65 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, since the relevant clauses of the notices were not ticked, which is a legal requirement that the satisfaction of the deposits in the quest be satisfied. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer had nothing to do with further proceedings under section 65 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, no action was taken under Section 13 of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979, except one year, Was again on different grounds, there was no action in relation to the issuance and removal of the notice. The proceedings initiated were declared invalid and illegal and all subsequent proceedings were subject to no jurisdiction and cancellation. The Assigning Officer was obliged to mark the appropriate clause. Already
