Section 221, 177 (4) and 155 (5) error correction Revenue claimed that the High Court directed to issue fresh notices regarding selection of case for audit under section 177 (4) of Income Tax Ordinance 2001. Was released. Whereas the Assessing Officer had amended the assessment under Section 122 (5) of Section 122 (5) of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001. information Based on explicit information of. Since such an officer did not comply with the meaning of section 177 (4) of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 and there was no need to issue fresh notice under section 177 (4) of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001. That the appellate tribunal cannot define the exact nature of the proceedings despite the explicit mention in the showcase notice. And relied on the issuance of fresh notices under section 177 (4) of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001. If the proceedings were made under section 177 of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001, the directions of the High Court would have been operative, but on the contrary, the Assigning Officer opted for direct action under Section 122 (5) of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001. The basis of certain information; and according to the appellate tribunal's findings that the decisions of the High Court were not followed which required correction which required correction, the issue of accuracy has been raised that section 122 (1) ) Has been read with section 122 (5) of the Income Tax Ordinance, as amended, the notices issued under section 122 (9) of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 were based on these facts and figures, The facts of this case were not justified by the High Court's decision which was independent of the proceedings initiated in 2001. Ink under a notice issued under section 122 (9) of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001
