Find a Lawyer

versus STATE

Section 221 (1) Correction of error The appeal was rejected by the first appellate authority The SC sent a request for correction stating that the notice of hearing was not reached properly before the appellate authority observed. That the call notice was not presented correctly and the order was withdrawn after considering the facts. After giving the department a reasonable opportunity to examine it, it was instructed to set aside instructions for re-setting on merit, saying that the first appellate authority did not have the authority to withdraw its order and its correction was against the law when on facts. After careful consideration the decision was given. In that case, no circumstance can be rectified and no attempt can be made to disobey the law. In the first case, the appellate authority made a conscious decision which rejected the appeal of the assessee. There may be errors. Correction should be made only where it was floating at the record level and i did not involve re-examination of facts or evidence before the appellate authority did not have the authority to return its order for correction under this law. The appropriate action was that the taxpayers should have agitated in the Court of Appeal, which was competent in the matter. The calculation of all relevant facts to reach the conclusive conclusion of the First Appellate Authority approved under Section 221 (1) of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 was not only illegal but also a breach of judicial discipline as the First Appellate Authority. Had reversed its own order. Under Section 221 of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 by the First Appellate Authority best law firms from Nilore lawyer