TWIN CITY HOUSING (PVT.) LTD., ISLAMABAD versus C.I.R., LTU, ISLAMABAD
Sections 36, 32, 34, 120 and 122 (1) (5) Income Tax Rules, 2002, R68 CBR Circular No. 2 of 1975 Completion of Year of Long Term Contracts Recovery Plan All year development of land Receiving the income received from and receiving the plots under Section 36 of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 received 25% 25% and the behavior of the department was accepted. Since the taxpayer company has not competed against any appellate authority, there is no tax on the remaining 75% advance tax on a proportionate basis of 25% for each subsequent year. The deduction was deducted, dividing the remaining amount by 25% in the coming years, which was completed from the estimated tax year 2006 to 2008, under the net savings profit margin under Sec 122 (1) (5). 10% (estimate) was taken under the amendment. ) The Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 was made accordingly. And claimed that the revised assessment for tax year 2005 was the basis for amending the subsequent deemed assessment. And the taxpayers did not challenge the fact that the appraisal was amended in 2005; and the appellate tribunal was amended the following year, and the Assisi now delayed the concession. The application was filed when it was believed that all the years were diagnosed on the wrong premises because only the cost of the proportionality method was talked about in which the entire feasibility cost was divided by X. Department 100 took the collected receipt data, then was distributed all the years in a ratio of 25 to the fact that the taxation officer did not do this.
