Find a Lawyer

AFTAB SOAP FACTORY (PVT.) LTD., FAISALABAD versus C.I.T., R.T.O., FAISALABAD

Additional grounds for appellant for section 36 & App 46 Appeal Appeals laid down additional grounds for appeal, provided that the time for the decision of the improper judgment in terms of section 36 subse of the Sales Tax Act 1990 Was influenced by the range of And that in the absence of a charge sheet and in the absence of an accurate statement of allegations relating to the delinquency of the act, the notice of illegal, invalid and unlawful action under section 36 (1) of the Sales Tax Act 1990 Was illegal. Because the defendants were purely of a legal nature, they could be allowed to incite arguments, no doubt that the appellant tried to argue on additional grounds, but in his application Appellant was, according to her best. The application of the principles is allowed to inflame the earth

Related judgments — Inland, 2011

• MODEL STEEL ENTERPRISES (PVT.) LTD., LAHORE v. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, CENTRAL EXCISE AND SALES TAX (ADJUDICATION), LAHORE 2011 PTD 2788
• C.I.R., ZONE-II, L.T.U., KARACHI v. NAQSHBANDI INDUSTRIES LTD., KARACHI 2011 PTD 2809
• MEHR DASTGIR TEXTILE MILLS LTD., MULTAN v. COLLECTOR SALES TAX, MULTAN 2011 PTD 2822
• COLLECTOR OF SALES TAX, FAISALABAD v. SUN RISE FOOD INDUSTRY, FAISALABAD 2011 PTD 20
• CIR LTU-ISLAMABAD v. RASTGAR ENGINEERING CO. (PVT.), ISLAMABAD 2011 PTD 168
• 2011 PTD 184 2011 PTD 184
• CHAUDHRY BROTHERS COTTON INDUSTRIES, BAHAWALPUR v. COLLECTOR (APPEALS) (REFUND), CUSTOMS, SALES TAX AND FEDERAL EXCISE, MULTAN 2011 PTD 212
• ASKARI CEMENT LIMITED, WAH v. COLLECTOR CENTRAL EXCISE, RAWALPINDI 2011 PTD 228

All Inland judgments of 2011 →

lawer from fb area from Musafir Khana lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes