INTERLOOP (PVT.) LIMITED, FAISALABAD versus COLLECTOR OF SALES TAX, FAISALABAD
Sections 45 and 11 (2) asserted that the tax refund taxpayer's option was, in order to reject the taxpayer's refund claim, in fact the order assistant collector (refund) provided for section 11 (2). ). Under the Sales Tax Act 1990, because the Assistant Collector was not legally authorized to decide the cases under Section 11 (2) of the Sales Tax Act 1990, as specified under C (iii). Lakh is beyond the specified limit of Rs. Subsection (1) of section 45 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, issued a show cause notice, exceeded its jurisdiction and decision-making authority, thereby initiating proceedings to reverse the refund. Ten rupees was out of range. As of 00,000, the withdrawal amount was Rs 20,70,907 under section 45 (1) (ii) of the Sales Tax Act 1990, it was the deputy collector who should have issued the showcase notice and the assistant collector. (Refund) The original order was unlawful and the powers of an authority without legal authority may only be exercised by that authority and no one else exercising that authority will have any jurisdiction over the assistant collector. Maintaining it through and through the collector was also not troublesome in the eyes of the law; And \ no jurisdiction and they were given the option Appellate Tribunal has empty r \ n
