Find a Lawyer

TARIQ SULTAN & CO. versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN

Central Excise and Salt Act 1944 Section 3 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitutional application for the acquisition of scraps, ship plates, waste, rods or any vessel or other floating structure According to the notification of Excise Duty 13d 1996 through notification, the bill of entry into the imported vessel was presented to the Customs House in 1996, the Letter of Authority issued on 1996 demanded the applicant. Did the salary, the Central Excise Duty applicant claim, exempt from the payment of excise duty as reported on 13 1996 1996? OR Is the petition filed by the respondents claiming that the applicant has already submitted excise duty? Cannot claim exemption after which the qualified applicant submitted the pay order in favor of the respondents with the letter. ? The first installment of the total duty and tax on the ship's excise duty was not included in the breakthrough. The tax respondents enclosed such pay order, as well as from their signatures from the specified deposit The relevant Excise Duty Respondent was summoned to the High Court to explain his conduct but in the absence of such clarification the Council, the High Court, had submitted to him or the State. The exercise was practiced unethically by the relevant respondents. The High Court should send a copy of the decision to the Central Board of Revenue so that action duty is not paid against the defendant as intended. , The relevant department was directed by the High Court that if there was arrears against the applicant, other liabilities list of advocates from Kalar Syedian lawyer