TELENOR PAKISTAN (PRIVATE) LIMITED versus COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, L.T.U., ISLAMABAD
Sections 21 (g), 20 and 122 (5A) of the Contract Act (IX of 1872), advance deductions not allowed delayed payment of contractual obligations delayed payment delayed payment expenses Given and added on the basis that the obligations of the contract are being discharged. Violation of the agreement entered into under the Contract Act, 1872, and between the parties, was a breach of the Contract Act and the payment of the payment for payment of late payment charges was a violation of Section 21 (g). The taxpayer paid the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 for violation of the law of the land, on which the Contracting Act, 1872, the taxpayer held that Section 20 of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 imposed a condition that Any person may be allowed to deduct expenses incurred in whole and exclusively. Businesses unless specifically permitted by the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 Section 21 of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 considered the absence of fines or penalties for violating any law, rule or regulation. And that the delay in payment was not in violation of any law, rules and regulations, and that such expenses were a common feature of the agreements, the clause of the contract providing the interest on the delayed payment was made between the two parties. Was one of the terms and conditions. ; And said that the clause was neither a law / rule, rule or rule provision. And the provisions of section (g) of section 21 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, to be paid to a person for violation of any law, rule or rule clause (g) of section 21 of the Income Tax Ordinance.
