Find a Lawyer

SALES TAX APPEAL NO.K-87 OF 2004, DECIDED ON 6TH JANUARY, 2005. versus SALES TAX APPEAL NO.K-87 OF 2004, DECIDED ON 6TH JANUARY, 2005.

The penalties applied for non-submission of sections 26, 33 and 46 sales tax returns have been appealed to the customs and sales tax appellate tribunal collector, neither the facts have been ascertained nor any inquiry has been made nor is the case. A show cause notice was issued to decide on this, which was not before. In the absence of notice of a contentious issue as part of the showcase notice, the Adjudicating Authority was not competent to pass an order, no one should be a judge of its purpose, court, tribunals, judicial decisions. The judicial decision applies to the jurisdictional authorities. Without the formal process of legalizing citizens' rights, valuable rights of the parties cannot be taken away. The basic interest of justice was to protect all such formal proceedings; legal concepts were formulated for stability, consistency and uniformity in the discipline of justice. And to protect it against arbitrary errors, errors and failures of individual decisions, the Collector decided to issue an ue which was not a subpoena before him as part of the statement of the charges to the appellant and so on. By deciding, he acted outside his jurisdiction to pass a verdict on such a matter, the unconstitutional order, in the circumstances, suffered a disqualification of the rule, even otherwise, to impose a fine. shown, it would also have been shown that the offender was committing some criminal activity and that there was a mens ra In the absence of criminal intent there were factors that could not be punished. Appellant's M female advocates from Tharo Shah lawyer