ISLAMABAD ELECTRIC SUPPLY COMPANY LTD. versus COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE, RTO, ISLAMABAD
Sections 46, 2 (18), 30 and 57 Income Tax Ordinance (XLEX of 2001), Section 2 (2) and 130 Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue Rules, 2010, RR 9 and 13 Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) ), O VI, R 15 and O III, Rr 2 Court Fee Act (VII of 1870), Schedule II, Article 1 The reason for the defects in the appeal of the appeal of the appeal tribunal was that the application was directed by a registered person. Was entered without, because it was not confirmed. It was alleged that the appeal was never heard, either by letter of any authority or by a power of attorney from a registered person; that, through a letter filed by an unauthorized person, the record shows that the appeal Has been heard, unless this notion of truth attached to the official record is proven otherwise. That the contents of the correction application were not endorsed by any affidavit of the registered person. This request was never signed by a registered person or sealed by a public company / registered person. That no court fee was imposed on the application / letter. This application / letter was sent to the Registrar of the Appellate Tribunal, which was against section 2 (2) and 130 of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 and the rules of the appellate tribunal. This application was filed without the necessary and appropriate parties. This application was filed without appendix to the required documents under Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue R11 and the application was filed under Section 557 of the Sales Tax Act 1990 and related to correction of scholarly or mathematical error at the relevant time. Such provisions are included. In any evaluation, the Office of the Inland Revenue Officer of the Inland Revenue Expression
