BILAL SAEED versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD
28 (1) Complaints against non-refundable refunds Claimant's claim for refund for tax period during March and June, 2010, which was returned due to incorrect input tax deduction on the purchase of stationery. The advertising services were rejected by the buyer by the department stating that as long as the amount in accordance with R28 (1) Sales Tax Rules 2006, (Section RO 555 (I) / 2006) A refund claim cannot be filed until the return claim is filed (5 6 2006) incorrectly described by the buyer and input tax as \ advertising services as The supply of stationery from the complainant was deducted at the maximum rate, excess amount was deducted and deposited in the public exchequer, relevant documents were required to be returned to the complainant filed by the complainant. Specifically, no comment was made on the complainant's tax profile also reflecting the complainant's excessive refund of non-refundable companies, along with the requirements of the Sales Tax Rules 2006, the basis for dismissing a refund claim. Could not have been created otherwise. The summary of the complainant's claim for refund without passing a regular order was not legally credible. Was instructed to strictly re-appoint on this claim. Order a legal order after hearing the complainant within 21 days and report compliance within 7 days thereafter \ r \ n
Related judgments — Federal Tax Ombudsman Pakistan, 2012
