Find a Lawyer

NAVEED ENTERPRISES, FAISALABAD versus COLLECTOR SALES TAX AND FEDERAL EXCISE (RTO), FAISALABAD

Sections 131 and 132 (2) of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 2005, R20 (2), the next date of hearing of the application for restoration of the appeal, which was hearing on 27 9 2010, inadvertently in his diary 29 It was noted as of 9 2010 that the taxpayer's non-filing was not intentional and deliberate on the date of the hearing, which was supported by an affidavit to restore appeal in the interest of justice and fair play. The request was allowed, and the previous party order was withdrawn and the appeal was restored to its original number.

Related judgments — Inland, 2011

• PAKISTAN TELEVISION CORPORATION LTD. (P.T.V.C.L.), ISLAMABAD v. COLLECTOR (ADJUDICATION), COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, SALES TAX AND CENTRAL EXCISE 2011 PTD 1513
• COTTON ARTS (PVT.) LTD. v. COLLECTOR SALES TAX, FAISALABAD 2011 PTD 1548
• MYKA STEEL (PVT) LTD. v. COLLECTOR, SALES TAX & FEDERAL EXCISE, PESHAWAR 2011 PTD 1588
• TAJ PROCESSING INDUSTRIES (PVT) LTD. v. C.I.R. (R.T.O.), FAISALABAD 2011 PTD 1625
• COLLECTOR OF SALES TAX, FAISLABAD v. BASHIR PRINTING INDUS., FAISALABAD 2011 PTD 1645
• NIAGRA MILLS (PVT.) LTD, FAISALABAD v. COLLECTOR (APPEALS), FAISALABAD 2011 PTD 1656
• BASHIR PRINTING INDUSTRIES (PVT.) LTD., FAISALABAD v. C.I.R. (RTO), FAISALABAD 2011 PTD 1669
• INTERLOOP (PVT.) LTD. v. COLLECTOR OF SALES TAX, FAISALABAD 2011 PTD 1680

All Inland judgments of 2011 →

immigration advocates from Jhudo lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes