Find a Lawyer

KARACHI STEVEDORES CONFERENCE LTD. versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN

Central Excise and Salt Act 1944 Section 4 (2) and 12A Central Excise Rules, 1944, R96ZM Central Excise General Order No. 1 1998, (No. C No. 1 (35) CEBL 90, History 8 7 1998) Notification SRO 456 (1) / 96, dated 13 1996 1996 Notification SRO 680 (1) / 95, dated 11 7 1995 amended by a notification taken by the Central Excise Duty Recovery Studios plaintiff. The authorities were demanding a central excise duty. On the basis of the notification, a general order, as well as against the provisions of the Central Excise Act, 1944, the extension or increase of justification by the General Orders was illegal and was the only way the schedule could be amended without Parliament. By reference to the Central Excise General Order No. 1 of 1998 by an Act of and not by an administrative order, C No. 1 (35) CE Bill 90, dated 8.7 1998 was repealed, without any legal authorization and when The circular was void and had no legal effect, no claims or demands or any other legal effect, the Central Excise General Order Witt based High Court judge accordingly MC officials were barred from claiming that the amount of any such how to become a advocate from Qalandarabad lawyer