AZIZ BROTHERS, RAWALPINDI versus COLLECTOR SALES TAX, RAWALPINDI
Sections 3 (1) (3), 2 (25), 2 (47), 6 (2), 7, 8, 14, 21, 22 (1), 23, 25, 26, 34, 36 (1), 45 B (2), 49 and 53 Sales Tax Registration Rules, 2005 Section RO 485 (I) / 2004 Dated 12 6 2004, Part V Tax Jurisdiction The legacy of the United Nations business taxpayer without registering the taxpayer. Under the Sales Tax Act, 1990, taxpayers were temporarily charged with failure to submit sales tax and failure to register, including the fact of not submitting a valid monthly sales tax return. The cause notice to an expired person was invalid and illegal. The allegation of non-compliance with the provisions of the Sales Tax Act 1990 was baseless and false because all of these provisions apply to a person who is regularly registered under the Sales Tax Act, 1990 and according to which these provisions are not related to any law. Registered person; default action could not be initiated against the legacy of the terminator if it was not determined or constituted at the time of his death provided reliable taxable The outstanding sales tax was not deposited but the taxpayer's position had expired in advance of the taxpayer. Sales tax liabilities cannot be demanded by the late person was unfounded. Responsibility was not demanded from the individual or the occupant but from the business entity. It was based on evidence-based transfer of property from father to son taxpayers, which could be registered under Section 14 of the Sales Tax Act 1990 but failed to collect the sales tax due on time, the first appellate authority to pay the tax. Directed to register one, if any
