Find a Lawyer

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ZONE-C, LAHORE versus MUHAMMAD ALAMGIR

Section 3 [as amended by the Wealth Tax (Amendment) Ordinance (XXI of 2000)], 16, (5), 45 A&27 Assessing Officer stated that the wrongful officer was received by the tax officer even though Section 3 I was not mentioned. Under the Wealth Tax Act, 1963, we had the jurisdiction to collect the Wealth Tax but there was no prejudice to the review, no appointment of the latest authorities was required till 30, 2001 That the whole law was set up with officers as well under the Wealth Tax Act, 1963, enjoying their appointment and jurisdiction, which was made and assigned before. The change in this period, if any, was administrative if in such a situation the Wealth Tax Officer was made a Taxation Officer in addition to the earlier assignments. If used, simply use one or both of the two concepts, the assessment would not fail, and the provision of section 45A of the Wealth Tax Act, 1963, was fully applicable, except for the wealthy Wales tax office. And to refer to the concept is the Secretary or Deputy Commissioner of Wealth Tax or the proper authority who mentioned the wrong name, although in any case it had full jurisdiction to assess the wealth of any Assamese, Was not harmful, it was not a matter of evaluation under one issue and demand under another. The law was the only clerical error in the law that was not a special assessment formulated by the Wealth Tax Officer, which was filed with the taxing officer under the Income Tax Ordinance 1979, as well as the Income Tax Ordinance. law firms from Naukot lawyer