Find a Lawyer

E.M. OILS MILLS AND INDUSTRIES LTD. versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AUDIT DIVISION II, COMPANIES III, KARACHI

Selection of full review for sections 109, 122 and 177 Audit requesting increase in profit on property settlement through application of the SC request that it was not provided enough time to furnish full details of such sale and The taxation officer obtained remand in the haste case. The Appellate Tribunal for the tax officer to retain his decision was not in the assessment order field after considering the evidence presented by the request for diagnostic reference against such a remand order, though premature and misunderstood. Such a reference was excluded in order to be \ r \ n \ r \ n

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2011

• DEWAN FAROOQUE MOTORS LIMITED, KARACHI v. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LEGAL DIVISION, KARACHI 2011 PTD 2668
• TANZEEM AHMED KHAN v. PROVINCE OF SINDH through Secretary Co-operation Department, Sindh Secretariat, Karachi 2011 YLR 2671
• ABID ALI v. State 2011 YLR 2689
• DIGREE WINE SHOP v. DIRECTOR-GENERAL EXCISE AND TAXATION 2011 YLR 2693
• FAISAL ELAHI v. State 2011 PTD 2714
• LIAQUAT ALI v. BAKHSH ALI alias BAKHSHO 2011 YLR 2731
• SAIFUDDIN v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Revenue Division, Ministry of Finance, Islamabad 2011 PTD 2760
• WAHEED RAZA PATHAN v. State 2011 YLR 2760

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2011 →

immigration advocates contact from Guddu lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes