Find a Lawyer

MESSRS DADA BHOY CEMENT INDUSTRIES versus COLLECTOR OF SALES TAX, KARACHI

Sections 3 (1) and 2 (g) Excise Duty on Production Capacity (Cement) Rules, 1991, R49 (1) CBR Instructions / Instructions No. C No. 1 (18) CE Budget / 91 Dated 4 8 1991 c. BR Letter C No. 1 (18) CEB 91 Vol. 2, dated August 21, 1993, despite not leaving the factory for domestic use, demanded excise duty on the clinker from the cement manufacturer, but used to manufacture cement in the factory premises. And was used. The capability-based Excise Duty on Production Capacity (Cement), which was subject to payment of duty under Rules, 1991, was legal, valid and in all four corners of the relevant law as directed by the CBR. It has been observed, however, that the manufacturer is permitted to move a separate request to Clicker Excise with material details and particulars whereby the deduction of the amount specified on the amount of the cleaner in accordance with the terms of section 3 This request may be considered. (1) the Central Excise Act, 944 of the 1-capacity duty for which the manufacturer did not present credible evidence to the Appeal Forum advocates from Wahi hassain lawyer