ZIA INDUSTRY, GUJRANWALA versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD
Section 102, 59A, 62, 63/132, 103, 156 Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001), Section 122A Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 for the assessment of delayed refunds made under section 62 Additional payments were reported by the First Appellate Authority under section 63/132 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, review of the preceding section, the demand for income tax was made ineffective by the first year's refund, one and a half. After five years, the complainant was finally paid his return, which the complainant claimed. The additional payment for delayed payment of return should also be treated according to the law, which creates a strong speculation over the years of evaluation, from the years 2000 to 2000 and 2000 to 2001 and 2001 to 2003. was done. It was deliberately failed to repay the refunds generated in the assessment years in 2001 and 2002, the circumstances of 2003 were AID compulsory, as there were two such assessment years for subsequent years. The reviews and re-reviews made for the vehicle became a hindrance to the issue of refunds. To do so, they `` disrupted the prescribed process, disobeyed the instructions given by the First Appellate Authority and also issued instructions by the Federal Board of Revenue for refund. Because the complainant had stayed the appeal after five and a half years. According to the law, the additional payment due to the complainant was to be calculated on the basis of the order of the appellate tribunal, which found that the complainant was compensated for the delay in the assessment year 1999 to 2000 and 2001.
Related judgments — Federal Tax Ombudsman Pakistan, 2010
