Find a Lawyer

LUQMAN CORPORATION versus SECRETARY REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD

Article 177 Establishment of Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (2000V of XXXV), Section 2 (3) CBR Circular No. 1 (1) Section (ITAS) / 2004, Dated 28 7 2004 Audit Complainants Due to the issuance of the accompanying circulators, they could not decide whether to opt for incentives by paying more than 20% of the previously announced tax liabilities and increasing the tax liability and paying with these profits. For those who were discriminated against, benefited from this, while the issue of legality or validation of the Central Board of Revenue's guidelines Due to the absence of confusion and confusion, the complainants could not decide at the relevant time, there is no validity limit in CBR Circular No. 1. In 2004 it was demanded to distribute the revenue to benefit from it and was told that the election could only take place during the return estimation year and not afterwards, there was no viable complaint to take advantage of the said circular. Either choice or right must be given and the amended declaration submitted for the same year the Federal Tax Ombudsman recommends that the Central Board of Revenue instruct the competent authority to revoke the order of the tax officer approved. Cases; Give time to complainants until June 30, 2006, either select Circular No. 1 (1) S (ITAS) / 2004 for benefits and file a revised return for the relevant year with tax filing. ? Will be accepted and if all or none of the complainants have opted for the said benefits by June 30, 2006, on these matters, under Section 177 of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001, online advocate from Kunri lawyer