MUSSADAQ FARHAN CHUGHTAI THROUGH MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM CHUGHTAI versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD
Sections 111 (1) (b), 120 (1) and 122 (5) invalid income or assets were rejected by the department on the basis that the original withdrawal from the rupee account was not established. The sale of 57 kanal plots in the village, in installments, did not confirm the sale. The third and final agreement was executed and the amount received in its entirety could not have been used to finance the purchase of the property in the previous period. Had no idea exactly what he intended. During the audit, the audit proceedings were started on the basis that the complainant was a real estate dealer in Pakistan and the difference between the purchase price and the sale price in respect of the property sold by him. Taxes are imposed on the complainant's business. The Department of Revenue rejected all three agreements filed by the complainant to justify the sale of their property in the village; in the case of the buyers of these properties, the department has made any of the three confessions. There was no objection to the authenticity. Presented, which was plainly arbitrary, a contrary view is taken in the case of the complainant, when the property, the buyer of the property and the seller were the same, in fact the discri discriminatory department could not be approved in the same breath and the department. It failed to find that the complainant had rejected the source's declaration of arbitrary investment through income sources capable of buying the property. Sh
Related judgments — Federal Tax Ombudsman Pakistan, 2012
