UMER SHAHID PROPRIETOR U.S. MOTORS, LAHORE versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD
Amendments to Sections 122 (9) and 121 Appraisal of any default unilaterally deferred action, refusal of a request for accuracy did not arrive to taxpayers Courier Service Record confirmed That the refusal to postpone the letter of the Issuing Officer was received. The due date for compliance with the notice issued under section 122 (9) of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 was 279 2011 when the Assessing Officer stated that he issued the refusal letter on 29 8 2011 but two days after the due date. The Assessing Officer did not have a comprehensible explanation for the complainant's delay in receiving his denial letter, which was a decision to proceed unilaterally from one side to the next, and after that date The notice stated that he failed to take both arbitrary and legally unqualified probation officer on the due date reported by the complainant. Knowledge of default; and no order sheet was registered to this date; excluding it and commissioning proceedings were subject to gross misconduct. Directs the vacancy on 30 2011 8 2011 approved under. Tax Ordinance, 2001 (Tax Year 2010) Issue a new order, according to the law, after requesting your reverse jurisdiction under section 122A of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 and providing the complainant with a hearing. \ n
Related judgments — Federal Tax Ombudsman Pakistan, 2012
