ASSISTANT COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS AFU, AIRPORT, LAHORE versus MESSRS TRIPPLE-M (PVT) LTD. THROUGH MANAGING DIRECTOR
Notification Section R561 (I) / 88, Dated 30 6 1988, Payment Limitation of Notice of Requirement under Section 32 (3) of the Regulatory Duty, Customs Act, 1969, approximately two months after the approval of the goods. On November 7, 1989, the authorities issued a notice of demand for the recovery of regulatory duty. After receiving the response of the importer, the authorities remained silent for almost three years, when a notice of hearing was issued to the importer on 31 8 1992. Authorities decided the case against the importer, but using the high constitutional jurisdiction, the court set aside the ruling by the authorities that the order was in fact an unreasonable delay. Which was passed after the authorities said they had legal notice was issued within the prescribed period. , While the second notice was just a notice to hear this case, a legal notice was issued less than two months after the consignment was cleared and as a result it was within time. There was a notice dated 31 October 1992 that required the importer to present to the authorities to show the reason why a short recovery was not made as a regulatory duty. There was no fresh show cause notice to be issued The show cause notice of the time and it was started with a notice of hearing.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
