Find a Lawyer

APPEAL NO. 121/ST/IB OF 2004, DECIDED ON 13TH FEBRUARY, 2006. versus APPEAL NO. 121/ST/IB OF 2004, DECIDED ON 13TH FEBRUARY, 2006.

Section (AA) Applicant / Taxpayer's Claim of Additional Taxation To determine whose name the taxpayer's receipt for delivery of bitumen was made and whether it was supplied with government agencies. Was the contract based on end users and were these supplements considered by government agencies? The registration or self-recipients failed to prove their competitor's claims with documentary evidence, or else In this case it is true whether the government agencies were actually supplied as end users or the contractors Needs to confirm whether it will receive more tax or not, and after the fact that the advertising officer has been set aside and a case remand for the de novo verdict has been discovered, the delivery of bitumen That is, government organizations or other persons, if any, are not responsible for registration or the contractor or other person responsible for registration as claimed by the sales tax authorities and then the decision of this case Please. Able to hear reasonable claims and to support evidence in support of their respective claims, on merit and in accordance with law, with both parties. online advocate from Manoabad lawyer