Find a Lawyer

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS versus MAPLE LEAF CEMENT FACTORY LTD.

Section 19 and 193 Machinery for Cement Plant have been imported in accordance with Section RO No. 484 (I) / 92; Notice of demand for customs duty on machinery was issued to the Revenue application locally before the Supreme Court if the respondents were ready to file such notice through the pleas made available under the law. If so, the Authority would decide accordingly, under which the Supreme Court set aside the unwarranted decision of the High Court and appealed. Directed ndh. Failure to file such notice within the stipulated time, and in the event of failure to do so, the Authority will act against it according to law. \ R \ n

Related judgments — Supreme Court, 2012

• Suo Motu action regarding VIOLATION OF PUBLIC PROCUREMENT RULES, 2004 2012 PLC(CS) 394
• GHULAM MURTAZA v. PROVINCE OF PUNJAB 2012 SCMR 395
• HAFEEZ AHMAD v. CIVIL JUDGE, LAHORE 2012 PLD 400
• TEHSIL MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, MURREE v. PREMIER GAS LINK, LAHORE 2012 SCMR 406
• COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS v. FATIMA ENTERPRISES LTD. 2012 SCMR 416
• MUHAMMAD ASHRAF v. State 2012 SCMR 419
• SANA INDUSTRIES LIMITED v. GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN 2012 PTD 420
• Mst. GUL JAN v. NAIK MUHAMMAD 2012 PLD 421

All Supreme Court judgments of 2012 →

law websites from Chohar Jamali lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes