COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, LEGAL DIV. RTO, HYDERABAD versus SHAD & CO. CARRIAGE CONTRACTOR HEAD OFFICE; HYDERABAD
Section 177, 122 (3) (b) and 114 (6) of FBR Circular No. 3 dated 2009 7, 2009 Refusal of audit taxpayers to accept return of audit claim that the tax officer made a mistake While for all purposes do not consider revised returns. Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 and \ All Purposes \ meant that once the return was filed which was considered an order considered under section 122 (3) of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 and the taxation officer took the audit process seriously. Error refusing to accept revised returns during. And such a principle was not adopted by the Commissioner under a clear legal declaration. The accuracy tax officer just reproduced the revised statement, which was based on the second revised return, and when the tax officer re-submitted, he did not indicate any negative sign about accepting or rejecting the amended return. had gone. The calculation of receipts and expenditures on orders and tax adjustments based on the second revised return, was the responsibility of either accepting the amended return or rejecting the revised return and reviewing it with a subset of shares. The issue of deferred return should be expedited. ()) Before entering into an amendment by section 122 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, the Finance Act, 2009, the taxpayer shall in any way look under the provisions of section 114 (6) of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 Permission to enter modified returns was allowed. Section 122 of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 is expressly allowed within 5 years of filing the original Return Subsection (3). Reviewing the return taken for all purposes of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001
