Find a Lawyer

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, LAHORE versus NESTLE MILK PACK LIMITED, SHEIKHUPURA

Section 13, Sixth Schedule VI, (3) (iv), 32 (2), 36 (2), 47, 55, 65 and 72 High Court Response / Importer's Appeal Exemption Claim, `Non-lactogen various Imports various consignments of A1 110 and 1901 1010, seeking its clearance under the PCT claiming exemption from the sales tax on Schedule VI of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, in the light of The Central Board of Revenue had issued a letter dated 276 1996 through 1/42 STT. Addressing collectors and deputy collectors, the issuer's ignments were issued on an oil-based basis, which was later alleged by the Central Board of Revenue Adjustment on the basis of audit paragraphs issued by the revenue receipt. That it is acceptable to accept the sales tax waiver. And only 0401 heads were included under all types of dry milk PCT and not milk-based food preparations were categorized under the audit paragraph of 1990 10 1010 under PCT. The statement issued by the letter from the Central Board of Revenue is invalid. Because the Central Board of Revenue was not authorized to amend or amend Schedule VI of the Sales Tax Act 1990 through a letter excise and sales tax appellate tribunal, it was agreed by the Central Board of Revenue Extension / Extension Sixth Schedule to Sales Tax Act, Serial No.3 (iv) of the Sixth Schedule to Sales Tax Act, 1990, issued by his letter dated 06/6 1996 and found that the letter was initiated and decision-making proceedings in the field. In fact, the orders were really bad as well. Legitimacy remains intact, no interference case has been reported for reasons advocate for immigration from Gari Mori lawyer