C.I.R., ZONE-II, R.T.O., MULTAN versus ARAIN FIBERS LTD., MULTAN
Sections 161 (IB) and 151 (1) (d) of the taxpayer fail to collect the taxpayer's tax deduction or pay the deducted dividends for payment of the taxpayer's company to the taxpayer. The tax should have been deducted at the rate of 10% of the time. Treating taxpayers the same as default taxpayers, the taxpayer did not face the provisions of section 151 of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001, in which companies were held liable for tax deductions. The tax officer failed to state in section 151 KCL (D) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 relating to payments made in connection with any bond, certificate, debenture, security or instrument profit, in the above five items. Which taxpayer case was included in which the taxpayer's interest was paid to the taxpayers of section 151 (1) of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001, no loan documents / instruments were available in writing and neither board There was a decision to take off. Directors were not paid by a debt instrument to pay markup on the equity of the affiliated companies, on the basis of which the beneficiaries could be paid Section 151 (1) (d) of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 Is. Identification was also not required by the tax officer, now the taxing must have been offered and taxable at a nominal rate as income from other sources was taxable as per section 161 (1B) of the Income Tax. The taxation failed because the provisions were not paid. The Ordinance, 2001, except for clauses (a) and (b) of section 161 (1B) of the Ordinance, was implemented where, at the time of tax collection,
