Find a Lawyer

APPEAL NO. 157/LB OF 2002, DECIDED ON 10TH JULY, 2002. versus APPEAL NO. 157/LB OF 2002, DECIDED ON 10TH JULY, 2002.

Sections 7 (1), 3, 6, 8, 10, 34 and 66 of the Finance Act (III of 1998) tax liabilities determine tax period from July, 1998 to November 1998, adjustment of input tax adjustment of input tax. Against the ineligible output tax that the adjustment was made after a fixed period of one month. Accuracy tax was paid at the import stage before tax was paid because the input tax was adjusted against the competent output tax, for which timely implementation was in progress. Time but the legal provision of the law relating to that right remains intact The dependence of the petition may apply but the government revenue cannot be stolen and the claim for legal right support cannot be defeated but the input against the output The legal right of the party claiming tax or adjustment cannot be defeated. The tax was further supported by the provision of Section 10 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, which allows for higher amounts of input tax to be carried over to the next tax period, and the surplus if it is accrued over a period of one year. If the tax was not fully covered by the tax, the person registered under Section 66 of the Sales Tax Act 1990 had to return, which in addition to setting the limit, allowed the account to be refunded as well. Is. Input tax adjustment was not claimed within the relevant tax period. Input tax adjustment in the input tax over the tax period was associated with a procedure which compelled to retain and exercise the right. Instead of doing it was admirable to facilitate exercise. A cumbersome way of resorting to Section 66 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 advocates from Zahir Pir lawyer