PROJECT DIRECTOR versus PRESIDING OFFICER, PUNJAB LABOUR COURT
Article 65 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3) was allowed to consider the leave to appeal. (i) that the Income-tax Officer worked beyond his jurisdiction under section 65 of the Ordinance in an attempt to reopen the past assessment for the last 9 years as all material facts were already on the record of the department which On the basis of this were its predecessors. That it is permissible to review Spursi's is not a property holding company, which is not a real estate trading company. It was not just to suppress or hide any facts, but rather to change its opinion through the ITO, the same fact can be deduced from these facts. Thus, there was no legal basis for action under section 65 of the Ordinance. (ii) the High Court misunderstood the law that under the Income Tax Law, the reviewer had a reasonable remedy against the proceedings initiated against him, whereas in fact, there was no law against the issuance of false notices. There was no cure. Constitution page
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
