Find a Lawyer

FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN THROUGH SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, CENTRAL BOARD OF REVENUE, ISLAMABAD versus MESSRS BALOCHISTAN MINERALS & OIL (PVT.) LTD., QUETTA

Mobil Oil and Lubricating Oil Packed in the Central Excise Duty, Bulk Company of Section 2 (F) and 3 Section RO No. 456 (I) / 96, Dated 13 6 1996 Section RO No. 685 (I) / 2001, 279 2001 Was manufacturing and supplying Mobil Oil and Lubricating Oil in the Bulk High Court under a constitutional jurisdiction. It was announced that such supply was exempt from the Central Excise Duty that the lubricating oil in excess of 10 liters provided by the company would be covered under item number 2710 0082. Section RO No. 456 (I) / 96, Dated, 13 6 1996 and that section RO No. 685 (I) / 2001, dated 279 2001, was for the same explanation as the description of any such And was made by the first High Court decision. Under an appeal. By not challenging other Supreme Court decisions and adding another such head to bring oil lubricating oil into the government, authorities interpreted the Second High Court's interpretation of the relevant provisions of Section R645. Accepted. (I) /, 96, dated 6 1996 1996 1996 supported the No, the case of the company was supported instead of heading the authority's argument No. 27 271010 0083, after the Central Board of Revenue realized that the section R.O. Current provisions (I) /, 96, of No. 6 456, 1996, 1996 1996 1996 1996 bul did not cover a large number of oil supplies if the purpose of the new supply was merely to clarify the already existing situation. 2710 0082 It is also included as an explanation of item number 2710 0083 by section RO No. 685 (I) / 2001, dated 279 2001, section RO 456 (I) / 96, 136 1996 Was the amount of confession that oil in bulk Supplies were not covered. The present item is the Supreme Court of India Pakistan, top advocate family court from Nilore lawyer