Find a Lawyer

versus

Section 10 Sec RO 27 (I) / 98, dated 17 1 1998 Section RO 455 (I) / 2004, dated 12 6 2004 Section RO 501 (I) / 06, 31 31 2006 CBR Order C No. 2 (1) ST / L & P / 2000 (Pt), dated 28 8 2006 The claim of refund was not allowed on suppression of waste production and sale of surplus money that it was Suppressing money is related to production and sales tax on disposal. In the order of the repayment order or in the appeal order, the appellant claims that the production tax deduction had helped produce a physical verification report by a team of sales tax officers, Had confirmed that the cell sales compressed up to 26%. The written comments contradicted the findings of this report, nor did any evidence prove to prove allegations of waste / scrap manufacture or supply, and most of this amount was already decided by the same order. Was reversed and there was no justification for stopping. On such an appeal a small part of the claim was accepted and the department was instructed to return the balance of the appellant's claim \ r \ n advocate for immigration from Wahi hassain lawyer