C.I.R., ZONE-I, R.T.O., KARACHI versus CENTURY -- 21 SPORTSWEAR, KARACHI
Maintain records of Sections 24, 36 (1), 25, 33 and 73 and document tax period for six years. Refund of pre-approved refunds in July 2004, December 2005 and February 2006. Will be able to recover with surcharge. There was no response to the issuance of the notice and the required record was not submitted. The taxpayers said that the time limit for keeping a sales tax record in the law at the time of proceeding under Section 24 of the Sales Tax Act 1990 was five years after that judicial authority had submitted a notice for the acquisition of the record which was fixed from time to time. The proceedings were out of bounds and all the proceedings were against the law and without any justification the judicial authority found that a person registered under Section 24 of the Sales Tax Act 1990 must retain the record till the finalization of the proceedings but the law. This clause was filed under the Finance Act, 2010 and was not enforced by the M judicial authority in 2002. The order issued until 2005 was set aside by the first appellate authority department and it is stated that the first appellate authority issued an unauthorized assumption that the taxpayer was responsible for maintaining the record for only five years while Under the Sales Tax Act, 1990, the 24-year fixed period was six years or until that time the evaluation process was finalized. The decision-making authority passed the orders for collection of the entire tax amount along with the penalty on the assumption that the refund was incorrectly paid. The record was made The adjusting authority did not take into account the fact that the claims for refunds had been in place for the past five years.
