HAJI NASEEM UR REHMAN versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/WEALTH TAX
Appeals for estimating Sections 2 (2) (10), 27 and 45 Income Tax Ordinances (XLEX of 2001), Sections 2 (65) and 208 Wealth Tax Authorities were aggravating from a legal point of view that property under assessment The Tax Act, 1963 could only be appointed by the Deputy Commissioner Wealth Tax under section 9 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1963. And that the Income Tax Officer, appointed under section 208 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, including the Deputy Commissioner, under Section 9 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1963, the Wealth Tax Act, 1963, automatically Shall not be considered as Deputy Commissioner nor shall be taken to the Deputy Commissioner. The Central Board of Revenue for the appointment of a Deputy Commissioner for the assessment of financial tax, while the tax officers, including the Deputy Commissioner Income Tax, was appointed under section 208 of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001, the authorities submitted any such document. Could not show that the tax officer was given the additional authority to act as deputy commissioner under the Wealth Tax Act, 1963, that the taxation officer did not consider the applicant for the wealth tax, but He should have been a Deputy Commissioner appointed under the Wealth Tax Act, 1963. In this way the matter will be returned to the appropriate authority for action according to the law order
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2009
