Sections 221, 148 to 156, 233, 234,235 and 236 CBR Circular No. 10 (1) IT Judge / 04 dated 23 11 2004, order for correction of wrongdoing jurisdiction to review illegal taxpayers The authority filed this jurisdiction. In connection with the collection of tax, Commissioner MTU's case was confined to the case of persons who were not taxpayers, while Assessee was a regular taxpayer and based on the letter of the Central Board of Revenue dated 4 8 2005, the tax. The tax officer did not have jurisdiction over the matter and the appellate tribunal on this aspect of the matter did not consider it at the time the order was passed, in response to the notice regarding the Woldash tax, before the accountant, the appraisal officer. Appeared and submitted copies of the annual and quarterly statements under section 1765. Instead of challenging the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer, the Income Tax Ordinance 2001, and the annual audited accounts, El applied a completely different view of the jurisdiction. Initially place the reviewers in the wrong jurisdiction for themselves, and then before the appeal forums, cancel the reviews, cancel, vacate, cancel and cancel the tax from the appeal forums. In view of his own version of his own assessment of his assessment in the Company Circle, in this case the Assessing Officer of the Company Circle was remanded so that de novo proceedings in accordance with the orders approved by the Forum in this case. Yes. The appellate tribunal below vacated these circumstances \ r \ n
Related judgments — Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Pakistan, 2010
