Find a Lawyer

MESSRS TRIPPLE-M (PVT.) LTD versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN

Section 32 Section RO No. 505 (I) / 88, Dated 26 6 1988 Section RO No. 561 (I) / 88, Dated 30 6 1988 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitutional Request Regulatory Duty Limitation Authority Demand Notices issued The applicant has demanded regulatory duty after the release of the goods on payment of customs duty under section RO 5 I5 (I) / 88 under section RO No. 1 561 (I) / Section. The denial has been denied, but the Authority has not issued another demand less than 3 years later and the notice was actually dismissed by the petitioner and the order was dismissed. A review request was received from the same fate. In this case, legal proceedings were declared legal under section 32 at the relevant time. The first show cause notice of the Customs Act, 1969, was submitted to the applicant on 20 7 1989, while the second showcase less demand notice was issued on 31st 1989. The order was actually passed on 21-29 1992, the first notice if In order to issue within a fixed period of six months, then the notice should be processed within a reasonable time, it took another three years for the department to issue the second notice and thereby revoke its earlier notice. The given time period was to ensure that any person or income would feel safe after the settlement of the matter, that the purpose would be defeated, if the Customs Department After working and issuing notices within a stipulated period, allowed to sleep. In this case, or dragging on for years, the period for the issuance of the showcase notice naturally considers the completion of the proceedings at a reasonable time. Such action, if reasonable, immigration advocates contact from Phalia lawyer