MEHAR DASTGIR LEATHER AND FOOTWEAR INDUSTRIES, MULTAN versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS SALES TAX AND FEDERAL EXCISE
Sections 7, 8, 10, 11, 33, 46 and 73 Sales Tax Refund Rules, 2002, RR 4, 8 and 9 upon submission of the Refund Claim Clause, issued a show cause notice to Assissee under Sections 10 (4) and 11. (2) After hearing various views of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, which had been accused of several contradictions / irregularities, the Deputy Collector did not accept the refund claim as that of the Deputy Collector. The appeal was also rejected by the collector against the SC. ) According to R8 (1) of the Sales Tax Refund Rules, 2001, if any refund claim or part of it was found to be genuine and not acceptable under the law, within fourteen days the notice was issued to the assessee. In the present case, the notice was issued after a gap of about 3 years, which was time-barred, if the law was to do anything according to the law book. If required, the officer's letter and spirits act must be followed. There was or was contradictory o In spite of crossing the rules, there would be no legal support where the showcase notice should be canceled, unlawfully banned, by the authorities against the assassination. All actions taken were in vain and had no legal consequences. Subsequent orders were set aside in the eyes of the law and the Deputy Collector (Refund) was instructed to approve the return of the Essex in accordance with the law.
