SARAJ DIN & SONS, LAHORE versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD
Section 2 ()) Order, which was originally approved by Deputy Collector Custom Collector (Appeal) by deciding appeals against injustice, ineffective, collector (appeal), submitted that the appeals were under objection. Because the complainant has submitted. The required court fees, and appeals were also time-limited The Collector (Appeal) was unable to explain what prevented him from passing the appropriate order. And pleaded that his office had not notified him of the pending appeal without action. And assured that the action will be initiated without delay in accordance with the law. And the appeals will be dealt with in accordance with the law within 30 days, when after the opportunity has been given to the complainant, the appeals filed were left for more than 08 months, which the Collector (Appeal), hearing, There was talk of delays, negligence and recklessness. The AR submitted that the Complainant's Complaint was about the delay and negligence of the Collector (Appeal) in deciding its appeals against the orders of the Deputy Collector Customs against the previous 3 2010 orders. The Federal Tax Ombudsman instructed the Federal Board of Revenue to deal with the complaints filed by the complainant within 30 days of the opportunity to be heard, according to the law. n
Related judgments — Federal Tax Ombudsman Pakistan, 2011
