SITARA PEROXIDE LIMITED, FAISALABAD versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD
Demanding Complaint for Payment of Customs Duty and Taxes by the Federal 33 Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (2000 v. XXV), Sections 2 (3), 9 and 10 denied claims for refund. The notice was issued. In the constitutional petition, the High Court directed the complainant to submit the amount, which was deposited in the special savings certificates, which did not issue the certification until the first appeal or settlement until June 15, 2009. , Which was earlier allowed by the complainant to be filed by the appellate tribunal, under which the complaint will be allowed to claim the return of the complaint. Yes, the Appellate Tribunal then approached Customs for a refund, but none of the complainants requested Customs to issue a special savings certificate, and malicious customs. Customs also filed a claim for refund of the complaint amount for appropriate action against the Customs Commissioner. The NT cannot be allowed and the certificate cannot be issued because the Customs filed a reference in the High Court. What was the reference the Customs filed a day before the complainant filed the complaint. No order was passed by the High Court regarding the suspension or stay. If the Appellate Tribunal's order had not filed such a request on its own, the investigation of the exemption by the Federal Tax Ombudsman would not have any effect on the matter as long as malpractice cases could be banned. The order / tribunal decision which has been finalized cannot be implemented till then.
Related judgments — Federal Tax Ombudsman Pakistan, 2011
