CUSTOMS APPEAL NO.344/LB OF 2006, DECIDED ON 26TH JULY, 2006. versus CUSTOMS APPEAL NO.344/LB OF 2006, DECIDED ON 26TH JULY, 2006.
Section 179 (3) Sales Tax Act (VII VI of 1990), Section 36 (3) Income Tax Ordinance (XXI of 1979), Section 79 (4) The limitation of the decision on the powers to be objected was that the order passed Withheld under 179. ()) The Customs Act, 69 69 69 of the Sales Tax Act of 1990, read with section ((())), the justified objection was rejected because these provisions were by nature and not required to be followed by the provisions. The results of ()) were not given section 36 (3) of the Sales Tax Act 1990 and Section 179 (3) of the Customs Act 1969, in contrast to the provisions of section 79 (4) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 Objectionable Because of the law, because the delay in approval of the decision did not affect the proceedings, no order could be terminated, it could not be canceled or it could not be set aside. , Only on the basis that it was approved with an unreasonable delay.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
solicitors from Khair Pur Mir lawyer
