Find a Lawyer

NATIONAL BEVERAGES (PVT.) LTD., KARACHI versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD

Central Excise and Salt Act 1944 Section 3d Central Excise Rules, 1944, R11 Production Capacity (Eroded Water) Rules, 1990, R7A (i) Establishment of the Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXV of 2000), Section 9 asserts that refund of excess charge excise duty refund claim paid under the Production Rules, 1990, in view of the Department of the High Court's decision, receipt of additional duty, etc., The claim was barred because it was filed one year after the date of the High Court verdict. Refunds were also not acceptable under section 3d of the Central Excise Act, 1944, as the incidence of taxation was given to consumers. Section 3D of the accuracy of the Central Excise Act, 1944, considers that every person, who has collected or accrued a tax under any duty. Misrepresentation of any provision of the Act or which was not payable as duty or was actually more than payable, was obliged to pay the amount deposited to the Federal Government. Submitted to the user, he could not maintain the duty collected and was obliged to deposit the public treasury with proof of compliance. The incidence of such duty with the user shall be on the person who collected the duty. The complainant was not the receiving agent nor was the person who collected any duty, in fact he paid more duty than the federal government. It was being claimed that if the department opted to suppress that the incidents of duty had passed on to the user, it would prove pakistani advocates Abbaspur lawyer