Skip to main content

It is mandatory to disclose assets while filing returns

Image
By


The last date for filing income tax returns for the previous year has been extended to 30th April 2019. Whenever an income tax return is filed, wealth tax statement is filed along with it. It is mandatory to file wealth tax statement before filing of income tax return.

Most people fear of disclosing their personal assets or incomes in their returns. This fear is dangerous for themselves. The reason is that the Government already has the record of transactions and assets of most people in its record.

The system is centralized at the Government's end these days. From one system FBR employees can access CNIC details, FBR details, Bank Account details, foreign transaction details, NAB cases, FIA cases, SECP details and similar other details of any individual irrespective whether such person is a filer or not.

So it is best to be fair with the Government and to disclose the assets and transactions fairly to avoid any problems in future. For professional advise or for filing your returns you can contact lawyergolra@gmail.com

Regards,
Salman Yousaf Khan (Golra)
Corporate Lawyer
+92-333-5339880
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

HUMAN RIGHT CASE NO. 5818 OF 2006

By
PLJ 2008 SC 262 [Original Jurisdiction] Present: Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi & Ch. Ejaz Yousaf, JJ. HUMAN RIGHT CASE NO. 5818 OF 2006 Human Right Case No. 5818 of 2006, decided on 27.12.2007. Constitution of Pakistan, 1973-- ----Arts. 184 (3) & 199--Islamabad Land Disposal Regulation, 2005--Regl. 5--Suo Moto Notice--Directive of Prime Minister for allotment of residential plots--Determining the eligibility criteria for allocation of plots--Validity--Privileges--Fulfillment of eligibility criteria--Government is always empowered to grant appropriate privileges to its employees within the scope of law and its authority but nevertheless such power, Government is not under legal or Constitutional obligation to establish housing schemes and provide residential or commercial plots to its employees and it is not a Constitutional or legal right of any person in the service of Pakistan to claim such privilege in addiction to the terms and conditions of the service provided under ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Order of Wafaqi Mohtasib accepting grievance petition

By
  PLJ 2003  Peshawar  336 (DB) Present :  SHAHZAD AKBAR KHAN AND QAZI EHSANULLAH QURESHI, JJ. PAKISTAN  RAILWAYS through DIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT  PAKISTAN  RAILWAYS, PESHAWAR-Petitioner versus SAID MUHAMMAD and 2 others-Respondents W.P. No. 863 of 2000, decided on 14.4.2003. ( i ) Establishment of the Office of  Wafaqi   Mohtasib  (Ombudsman)  Order (1 of 1983)-- —-S. 32-Order of  Wafaqi   Mohtasib  accepting grievance petition of  respondent (employee) and holding him entitled to ' full  pension/commutation on the post, assailed—Respondent having been  retired from service on 27.8.1997, could not have been reverted to his  substantive post on 26.3.1998, after about 7 months of his retirement- Petitioner failed to prefer representation before President in terms of  . S. 32 of the Order (1 of 1983) and thus, did not avail remedy provided by  law-Another colleague of respondent who in sim...
Post a Comment
Read more

Proceedings before Wafaqi Mohtasib and President of Pakistan did not constitute Civil Proceedings

By
  PLJ 1999  Karachi  587 Present:  RAStfEED A.  RAZVI,  J.  SHIFAATULLAH QURESHI-Plaintiff Versus FEDERATION OF  PAKISTAN  through SECRETARY/CHAIRMAN, 'RAILWAYS, MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS (RAILWAY BOARD), ISLAMABAD- Defendant  Suit No. 192 of 1992, decided on 20.3.1998.   Limitation Act, 1908-- —-S. 14 Arts. 56 & 115-Limitation~Question of--Plaintiff after dismissal of  his claim for recovery of amount of damage by defendant, instead of filing  suit approached  Wafaqai Mohtasib  who accepting claim of plaintiff  directed defendant to pay amount of damage to plaintiff-President of  Pakistan, on appeal, set aside order of  Wafaqi Mohtasib-Plaintiff  filed  suit for damages and permanent injunction after about 3 years and 10  months from dismissal of his claim by defendants-Plaintiff claimed that  period spent in proceeding before  Wafaqi Mohtasib  should have been  e...
Post a Comment
Read more