MST. HALEEMA PERVAIZ versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ZONE `F\' KARACHI
Second Schedule, Part IV, CLA, Sections,, 11 and 15 Economic Reform Act (XII of 1992), in the present case, was a subsidiary of a foreign company, employed by a Pakistani company. Section 59A of the Income Tax Ordinance 1979 was filed with income tax return showing the income of the Income Tax, however, certain information was subsequently obtained in the possession of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax on the use of the stock. The option for 100 shares of a foreign principal company was not reported by all these employees and the allotment and sale of profit from such shares and profit related to it were not reported. Employees took action on the Income Tax Return, so were taken under Section 65, Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 and the matters of these employees were reopened The Assessment Order also showed that a Stock Option Scheme Employer. Was informed that there was a one-time option grant. They have the right to acquire 100 shares of the foreign principal company and all employees were eligible to exercise this option and said that these options were exercised by them and the profits derived from the sale of such shares. Was sent individually to a foreign exchange. Each income tax assessment assesses the deputy commissioner's foreign currency accounts, which he is entitled to under the domestic law of Pakistan, which is taxed on the remaining money received, which is the economic reform law, Under the provisions of 1992. The department was not violated because no inquiry was made by the department regarding the source of these deposits of the Assamese, nor was their disclosure to the banks.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2009
