Find a Lawyer

MESSRS GOBAL TELECOM (PVT.) LTD. THROUGH DULY AUTHORIZED CHIEF EXECUTIVE versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN THROUGH MINISTRY OF FINANCE, ISLAMABAD AND OTHERS

Section 11, 36, 46 (5), 47, 66 and 72 Sales Tax Refund Rules, 2002, RR 4 and 11 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitutional Petition Returns on sale by the High Court, Central Board The applicant was frustrated by the directive issued by the Central Board of Revenue to recover the money received as a case tax return and the most controversial applicant was the Sales Tax Act 1990. Of section 66 relates to interpretation. The sales tax return rules, 4 and 11 of 2002, dealt with the merits of the lawsuit and the decision-making authority was the only and appropriate forum, after which its prosperity could be ruled out or otherwise by the Central Board of Revenue. The sources cited by the Assisi in various letters and the facts of their subsequent withdrawal may also be decided by the authority as there was no pressure, responsibility or legal restriction on the authority's authority to issue the showcase notice. Questions about obtaining feedback by any direction, circular or letter issued by the Central Board of Revenue which interprets any suggestion or provision of law on a particular legal issue No order, direction or direction from the Board Can be given. Interfere with the discretion of officers in exercising the judicial functions of the nature of the provisions of Section 72 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, so that any sales tax officer is subject to judicial duties surrounding it. Was not obliged to comply. , Directions or instructions that were against the expression of any law, rule or example of a superior court, were excluded in the circumstances us immigration advocates from Digri lawyer