SHAHSONS PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD., MULTAN versus C.I.R., R.T.O., MULTAN
Sections 177 (4), 120, 122 (9), 18, 20 and 22 Audit Tax Year 2008 Pre-election Notice Selecting a case for audit on the issue in which the costs of manufacturing and confirming profit and loss account expenses, And admittance requires examination. After the inspection of the return of income, reference to the provisions of Sections 18, 20 and 22 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, a notice of shock was issued on the details of the accounts presented and audited as there was no document in response to the issuance of the notice. The proof was not available, the test was amended and tax liability was created. The taxpayer claimed that the selection of the case for audit was illegal and invalid because no pre-election notice was issued. And before selecting the case for the audit department, the showcase notice was required that for the selection of the case for audit, the pre-selection show cause notice is not required as taxpayers have to prove their case during the audit process. There will be ample opportunity and if nothing is found invalid, the announced version will be accepted. The matter was not chosen according to the parameters of the law and the Supreme Court, even otherwise, to audit the matter itself. The choice was a negative order. Since it has violated the sanctity of the Assessment Order issued by the Commissioner Income Tax under section 120 (1) (b) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, since the issuance of a pre-election notice does not imply the principles of natural justice, Audi. Ultram was against Perm Selection. Section 122 (1) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, dismisses an order invalidating the facts and circumstances invalid.
