MUNIR FAZLA versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/WEALTH TAX (APPEALS) ZONE-II, ISLAMABAD
Sec & 66 and 6 136 ()) In some cases the assessment for reference to the High Court reference to the assessment was argued that an appeal was filed in the appellate tribunal for reference which was not entertained. Was forced to file a reference to the High Court under section 136. Pending the reference to the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, which was still pending, the tax officer again approved the review order. And the tax officer was told that a reference had been filed in the High Court. And a re-evaluation could not be decided when a cited reference was pending. The department said that taxpayers were required to present evidence before the High Court, which had not been submitted and the order of re-examination was approved. The High Court had not submitted any order because of the assumption of validity. Preventing the proceedings from reading the provisions of section 136 (8) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 shows that there is no restriction in the process of re-review after the decision of the appellate tribunal unless the order of the High Court has established its existence. There is no order for this. Rehabilitation was issued indisputably, the effect of the restoration was implemented only after the presence of the Assessment Orders, the legal proceedings could not be stopped, simply because the appellate tribunal order was pending, where no stay was issued. Was not performed in the event a re-review cannot be performed. Appeals or citations, after the filing, the words which show for recovery, are contained in sub-section (8) (excluding section 136 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979).
