Find a Lawyer

APPEAL NO. S.T.A.-81/LB OF 2002, DECIDED ON 13TH MAY, 2002 versus APPEAL NO. S.T.A.-81/LB OF 2002, DECIDED ON 13TH MAY, 2002

Cotton Ginning Factory has raised the demand for sales tax on the basis that sections of the 3, 11 (2) and 34 tax have been raised on the basis that the plaintiffs have shown production and supply of cotton seeds in which 53 53 89% of cotton was produced while others. The average factory maintenance ratio was 59% of the adjacent area. Assisi's assertion that the recovery of cotton seed recovery percentage by the Adjudicating Officer is based on the assumption that there was no uniform standard for uniformity of cotton seed recovery nor for the Department to prove it. A specific example is presented. The production of cotton seeds in various areas of Multan Calcutta was not justified, which was accepted by the local sales tax authorities in view of this information and in the absence of any further evidence. With the permission of the Appellate Tribunal, the minimum recovery rate of 55% was made in addition to the additional tax in terms of section 34 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, plus an increase and recovery of 55% was made by the appellate tribunal and the order was separated. Was done. immigration advocates contact from Chak 4 b c lawyer