STARPAK MARTIAL ARTS (PVT.) LTD. versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD
Section 35, 194A, 195C and 224 Establishment of Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (2000 X of 2000), Sections 2 (3) (i) and 10 (4) 23 of the Complaint of Corruption on Return of Customs Duty Claimants filed customs duty malpractice claims year 2004 and 2005 and while examining the documents, the department found that claims were filed after the expiry of the limits, Deputy Collector Customs dismissed the complainant's claims. And the appeal against the order of dismissal was dismissed, the complainant presented the appeal to the Tribunal, the Federal Board of Revenue decided to resolve the alternative dispute. Matey, who examined the case and stated that late submission of the claim did not benefit the exporter and it was unanimously recommended by the Sid Committee, 1969, for a late condolence under section 224 of the Customs Act. , But the Federal Board of Revenue rejected the recommendations of the Committee Complainant, which was charged with M. Almost three years after submitting the Committee's recommendations, the Board resolved to approve arbitrary and irrevocable orders, while making recommendations to the Board. Within days of receipt the decision had to be taken on the recommendation of the committee. The complainant's lawyer had submitted to the lawyer that the deputy collector customs had been delayed in similar cases and claimed that the defects of the duty were due to the government for withdrawal of citizens' money for some or no technical reason. The Federal Board of Revenue has, in many cases, supported the delay in filing the Federal Board of Revenue. The unanimous recommendation of the committee to reject revenue, recommended both irrational and irrational Ombudsman
Related judgments — Federal Tax Ombudsman Pakistan, 2012
