SHAHID MUHAMMAD SWABI versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD
Heading 87 02 & 87 03 Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXXV of 2000), Sections 10 (4) and 9 (2) (B) Customs surcharges and tax refunds due to any arbitrary classification Complaint against Pakistan Customs Tariff Limousine car, which was headed by the Federal Tax Ombudsman for investigation, instead of 02 87 02, heading 03 87 heading 03, the complainant's jurisdiction was that he imported the limousine car and dried it. Registered goods declaration at the port, where the Customs Pakistan Customs tariff, instead of accepting the declared rating, which is heading for 87% (20% duty paid), 87% Under WAN there is a default rating, which is 100% customs duty and 50% regulatory duty, and that Customs has overlooked the earlier decision. Review of Pakistan Customs Tariff Review of Complaint Committee and Federal Tax Ombudsman Secretariat's Last Complaint 02 87 02 a nd 87 03 The absence of clarity in the two headlines indicates that the Federal Tax Ombudsman's Office has already submitted to the Federal Board of Revenue It was directed to remove the confusion through proper modification / clarification of the Pakistan Customs Tariff Code. The classification came under section 9 (2) (b) of the Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance, 2000, but the matter from which the Federal Tax Ombudsman's Office was occupied was classified under Articles 87 02 and 87 03. Was lacking, which led to avoidance. Confusion / Lawsuit The Federal Tax Ombudsman recommended to the Federal Board of Revenue to decide the limousine car rating by law, and consider setting up a separate directorate on the assessment directorate's style.
Related judgments — Federal Tax Ombudsman Pakistan, 2012
