Find a Lawyer

R.M. TEXTILE, LAHORE versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD

Section 21 (4) and the establishment of the Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXV of 2000), Section 2 (3) of the amount indicated by the De-Registration, Blacklisting and Registration Suspension Audit Team of Section 73 Sales Tax Act 1990 was paid for fixing provisions. Complainant applied for issuance of non-objection certificate, Collector was suspended on the basis of audit report stating that complainant / Asset Buyer And there were sellers. It is suspected of goods and goods from blacklisted units and has been involved in claims of wrong input tax adjustment, duty and tax avoidance and fraud. The order was notified in writing and in the case of inquiry it was confirmed that the complainant was involved in the purchase and sale of the invoice. The registration is suspended, the inquiry should be completed within a reasonable period of time, more than 4 months after the suspension of registration, which had a negative impact on the complainant's business, still the inquiry Was not completed, there is no doubt that the relevant clause of the law did not write a deadline for completing the inquiry, which is why it should have been. Such delays in the completion of the investigations completed within a reasonable time led to the loss of the complainant, which was a corrupt Federation Tax Ombudsman, the Central Board of Revenue's collector should be instructed to immediately forward the required inquiry. Complete and take action accordingly. The investigation results in section 21 (4) of section 21 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, on the merit, but providing / giving the complainant the opportunity to defend criminal advocate from Tall lawyer