MEHAR DASTGIR LEATHER AND FOOTWEAR INDUSTRIES, MULTAN versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS SALES TAX AND FEDERAL EXCISE
RR 8 (1), 4 and 9 Sales Tax Act (VII VI of 1990), Sections 10, 11 (2), 3, 7, 8 (1), 73 and 33 (1) (c) Non-refundable The action was filed by the taxpayer claiming that the notice was issued because it was illegal and illegal because it was issued after a fixed period of time in the law. That the sales tax return was submitted within time and the input tax was claimed under the law and to that extent, the showcase notice should have been issued within 14 days after it was given a period of three years. Was issued over time, and it is continuing that notice of such delay was without guilt which had no legal sanctity in the eyes of the law and certainly lost its existence. If the showcase notice was outlawed, illegal and timely, then the authorities began taking action against it. Registered person was a jerk and had no legal consequences in the eyes of the taxpayers. Appointments of taxpayers certainly carried more weight. According to the order approving the refund.
