SAITA (PAKISTAN) (PVT.) LTD., KARACHI versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD
Establishment of Section 33 Office of the Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (2000X of XXV), Sections 2 (3), 9, 10 and 16 of the duty on customs duty and other tax refunds collected by Customs after repairs. The refusal and re-importation of machinery after repairs overseas will result in other taxes received by Customs on the machinery; It was temporarily recovered and the re-imported Customs Authority again imposed duty and other taxes, ignoring the fact that duty and taxes were already paid to the machinery machinery, requiring complainant duty. The taxpayer submitted a refund request as a result of the protest, but none of the beneficiaries alleged that the customs officials had twice taxed the arbitrary machinery and delayed the return. The department's representation also did not dispute that the cost of the machinery was on customs duty Is not taxed and re-importation is taxed as it was already taxed. Failure to properly impose duty and taxes on the re-importation of imported customs repair machinery, but despite the protests of the complaining officer, the complainant had erred in claiming the refund which would pay for its repair and cost. The extent of the difference between the amounts was clearly admissible. Re-imported machinery is charged at the full cost of filing e, disqualification, neglect and manipulation by the customer, equivalent to mismanagement such as the Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance.
Related judgments — Federal Tax Ombudsman Pakistan, 2011
