Find a Lawyer

B.P. INDUSTRIES LIMITED, KARACHI versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION ISLAMABAD

Section 81 Customs General Order No. 12 of 2002, Para 66 of the Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (Sec. 2X of 2000), Sections 2, (3) and 10 (3) Demanding Electronic Message Importer Determining the Limitation of Corruption Frustrated at the issuance of the notice, the customs authorities were responsible for disclosing that the evaluation was finalized and the postdate check issued at the time of the temporary assessment was taken by the importer that the authorities had taken the customs Under section 81 of the Constitution of the Act, 1969, orders for final assessment were not issued within 180 days. Authorities said that they had issued an electronic message to the importer, so the complaint was time-barred. After the temporary assessment, the Customs Group had the necessary action to finalize the determination of the assessment, which could carry out the necessary investigation, thereby ensuring the final decision-making process and the traditionally competent advance order. Issue as set forth in paragraph 66 of Customs General Order, K12, the final determination of the duty of taxation and imports by the importers was to be approved by the concerned Customs Group which sent the electronic message of the concerned Customs Group on 16 8 2007. Could not be determined as of the date of the final assessment of import tariffs, only notice dated 14 2 008 2008 was issued approximately 17 months after the temporary determination of duty and tax, which was not a notice of recovery nor a final determination of the duty and tax period that had already expired for it. I had a clear error case where the provisions of section 81 of the Customs Act, 1969, the procedure set forth in the Customs Value Rules and the Customs General of 2002 divorce advocates from Moro lawyer