Find a Lawyer

FROOTO INDUSTRIES (PVT.) LTD., KARACHI versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD

Section 66 Refund Claims to be Returned Within a Year Taxpayers claimed that the department did not allow the appeal to be effective despite repeated attempts to file a complaint, and did not delay the return and delayed the appellate orders. Claims have to be refunded but claims cannot be processed unless submitted via RCPS of the STARR system and no refund claims are allowed manually. Will And when the relevant officer approached the Director General of the Federal Board of Revenue (SP&R) for permission to produce an electronic refund processing order, it was told that the claim under section 66 of the Sales Tax Act 1990 was a valid counter-claim validity revenue. Can be listed in the Recognizing the refund claim, the RCC failed to process the subject's refund because there was no mechanism for dealing with the court order refund claims, where the bills. And receipt verification was not included, the delay was allowed to allow appeal to Star Software. The Federal Tax Ombudsman recommended that the Federal Board of Revenue review the instructions regarding the 12d 2003 refund process through the STARR so that both the refund payment and the record restoration were clearly provided. Instruct the concerned authorities to apply the appeal on the orders of the appeals of 24 1 2011 and 16 3 2011 and issue a refund as per law.

Related judgments — Federal Tax Ombudsman Pakistan, 2012

• MUMTAZ HUSSAIN MIAN v. SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD 2012 PTD 475
• AAMIR RIAZ v. SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD 2012 PTD 495
• POLY PACK (PVT.) LTD. v. SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD 2012 PTD 524
• ATM ENTERPRISES PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD., ISLAMABAD v. SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD 2012 PTD 538
• WAHEED SHAHZAD BUTT v. SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD 2012 PTD 554
• MUSSADAQ FARHAN CHUGHTAI through Muhammad Ibrahim Chughtai v. SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD 2012 PTD 565
• COMPLAINANT v. HAQ NAWAZ 2012 PTD 751
• E.M. INDUSTRIES (PVT.) LTD., SIALKOT v. SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD 2012 PTD 836

All Federal Tax Ombudsman Pakistan judgments of 2012 →

law firms from Ugoki lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes