COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE ZONE-II, REGIONAL TAX OFFICE, PESHAWAR versus SAYDON PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES (PVT.) LTD., INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, JAMRUD ROAD, PESHAWAR
Election defects for Audits Section 177, 114 and 122 After the commencement of the Audit Audit, the authorized authority, commissioner, and such audit was the effective authority to initiate the audit of a person under Section 177 of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001, and such audit Not only was the income related tax statements filed by the individual but also related to the entire income tax issue of such person. The criteria for determining the selection for a person's audit are the same as those filed by the person mentioned above. Was not limited to but may also include this person's compliance date. Or non-compliance with the Income Tax Ordinance 2001. Conduct an audit consisting of income tax matters, including the examination of the amount of tax payable, the business class and any other matter which, in the opinion of the Commissioner, was material to the determination of the correct income of the person. Accounts and records, Inquiries of expenses, assets and liabilities of an individual under audit, as such, were not limited to returns filed by the person who was under audit only if the audit was fully based on the details stated in the filed tax returns. Was based on , And the taxpayers submitted a revised tax statement for the said tax year under section 114 of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001, and if so described all matters raised in the audit notice. Then said that the audit would result, and thus the revised tax declaration would have to be accepted, and the amended assessment order would be approved under section 122 of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001, if the revised tax declaration contained only those Only if part of the matters were made clear was the audit notice, and not all, in the circumstances when all the matters raised in the notice for audit
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2015
