SALEEM TEXTILE, KARACHI versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD
Section 10 Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXXV 2000V), Sections 9 and 10 (3) Complaint against the Sales Tax Department for failing to resolve the deferred sales tax claim, which arises from exports at zero rate. ? The firm was suffering financially due to non-refundable approval. And that the objections raised by the jurisdictional department on the occasion of the filing of the complaint in violation of the provisions of the law were dismissed and the time under section 10 (3) of the formation of the office An apology was sought from the range. The Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance 2000, since the complainant firm is consistently pursuing its claims, but no formal bid order for accepting or rejecting this claim was delayed by the order department and on this claim There was no response from the department to participate. There was no justification for postponing complaints or jurisdiction in the jurisdiction, postponing the matter for years, when the law provided a fixed period for settling claims, if the return was due to careful consideration for any reason. If the latter was not done, a hearing order should have been approved within the stipulated time, for this purpose, no meaningful efforts were made during the period. It was made, the Federal Board of Revenue recommended, to instruct the Chief Commissioner to comply with the law within 21 days. Abq configure the efforts of all concerned to resolve their claims. Issuing instructions to simplify the mechanism for dealing with pending claims quickly
Related judgments — Federal Tax Ombudsman Pakistan, 2011
