Find a Lawyer

MST. LAIL UN-NISA versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD

Sections 170 (4), 164 (2) and 165 (1) of the Income Tax Rules, 2002, RR 51, 51A and 52 constitute the Office of the Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXV of 2000), section 2 (3) ) Despite the refund, the refund was accepted under the Self Assessment Scheme and through the operation of the Department of Law, which acknowledged that under the Self Assessment Scheme, the practice of acceptance or practice by law. The final status has been obtained, however, it is claimed that the IT30 / Demand Notice is not available so no refund was made. Failure to process the accuracy of the record and issue a refund was attributable to the absence of the original invoice / document. Copies of invoices provided under section 170 of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 have fulfilled their duty of fulfillment under Section 164 (2) of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 and this is confirmed by the DPC. ? Under section 165 (1) of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001, read the monthly / annual statements received by the Commissioner along with Regulations 51 / 51A and 52 of the Income Tax Rules 2002, if there is any interruption in filing the statements. , Due to errors or omissions in the designated procedures of the Central Board of Revenue, but no liability was left by the complainant to whom the recovery or tax had already been applied and the certificate was issued. The Federal Tax Ombudsman recommended that the refund be issued immediately after setting the prescribed formal steps and the cent. The Rail Board of Revenue has issued instructions / guidelines for fixing the error. Current order Pakistan, top advocate family court from Madinah lawyer