Section 14, 33 and 34 Establishment of Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXXV of 2000V), Section 2 (3) (ii) Registration Complainant / Company was associated with the same name \ Association of Person to and Registration of Sales Tax Was denied on the basis that it is already registered for sales tax purposes and is non-filer status. And directed that the missing sales tax submission be submitted with a fine of Rs. 5,000 per month as well as the default surcharge complainant clarified that the sales tax registration number presented was to the Predator / Association of Persons and not to the successor company. ? And that there was no need to file sales tax returns for the period that the forefathers / associations did no business on 6/6 2008. And as a precaution, the returns were filed but no sales tax registration number was issued. Revenue claimed that the directors at the company were partners in the "association" with the same name. The Registered Association of Persons, who is currently a registered sales tax person, did not submit sales tax statements after 30, 2008 and was directed to file a lost return and receive Rs. 5,000 per month. Outgoing fines also continued for a predetermined period. That the return was filed but no penalty or default surcharge was paid. And that it is pending for full compliance with the instructions by the Association of Personnel. The department did not issue a sales tax registration number to the company / complainant as the company was disqualified. Named when the company fined sales tax periods and
Related judgments — Federal Tax Ombudsman Pakistan, 2013
