Sections 30, 36 (3), 11 (5), 2 (18) and 33 (13) Section RO 547 (I) / 2008 dated 11 6 2008 FBR Circular Order C No. 1 (19) IR Code / 2007 OUTDOOR 11 11 In 2009, the Deputy Commissioner of Inland Revenue issued a show cause notice to the management why the amou = nt tax could not be refunded due to blacklisting of suppliers along with a 100% penalty. And the charges leveled against the registered person were retained. In the original taxpayers, the sales tax order claimed that the Deputy Commissioner of Inland Revenue was not legally able to issue the show cause notice and pass the judgment order at the relevant time. Cue Nor was there any notification for the appointment of Inland Revenue Officers in the Official Gazette under Sales Section 30. The Tax Act, 1990; that the proceedings initiated were void with no legal authority and no action. That it was illegal to impose a 100 percent penalty because the penalty amount was not contested in the showcase notice. And that the Sales Tax Act, 1990, was not guaranteed a fine of only 100 percent of section 33 (13) of 1990. Revenue acknowledged that no such notification was issued and published in the Official Gazette on the manner of Section R547 (1) / 2008. Dated 11 6 2008 but there was a circular order in which C No l (19) IR Code / 2007 OT Historical 11 11 2009 before the amendment to verify the validity of a legal order order, the appointment of \ Sales Tax Officers and The jurisdiction was granted. Appointment of Sales Tax Authorities on section RO 547 (1) / 2008 dated 11 6 2008 by a notification and assigning jurisdiction to any matter or area which was formally published in the Official Gazette but not the Sales Tax Act
