SALLM SERUJ LTD. AFGHANISTAN, PESHAWAR versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD
Section 156 (1) (64) Penalty for Crimes Personal sentencing and redemption penalties were referred by the appellate tribunal department for the release of goods, but no department claimed that reference was filed against the appellate tribunal's decision. That was pending before. Confirming the High Court's justification, the appellate tribunal affirmed personal penalties and redemption penalties, and the department filed a reference before the appellate tribunal against the appellate tribunal's decision but was not suspended. After filing an appeal in my forum itself. The lower forum decision was not automatically suspended. The establishment of the Office of the Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance, release of confiscated goods after the Appellate Tribunal's decision under section 2 (3) is unlawful, equates to corruption, the Federal Board of Revenue instructed the Collector of Customs, The decision of the C is concerned to ensure the execution of the appellate tribunal and the seized goods in accordance with the law without prejudice to the final result of the reference filed in the High Court.
Related judgments — Federal Tax Ombudsman Pakistan, 2012
