Find a Lawyer

MERAJ DIN versus COLLECTOR CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SALES TAX (APPEALS), LAHORE

The reference to the High Court in section (36 ()) and 2 47? in determining the amount of tax was the only question required to be expressed by the High Court. Notwithstanding the Customs, Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, it was reasonable that the Adjudicating Authority could pass an Article under Section 36 (3) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, in which the Applicant was appointed under the aforesaid Section Council for the prescribed second time. Exceeded limit of The case order was passed beyond the stipulated period under section 36 (3) of the Sales Tax Act 1990, for the period set out in section 36 (3) of the order under section 36 (3) of the Sales Tax Act 1990 Must pass in. The question of Sales Tax Act, 1990 was answered negatively in favor of taxpayers

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2009

• FESCO LIMITED through Chief Executive, Faisalabad v. LIAQAT ALI 2009 YLR 1988
• MUHAMMAD JAHANGIR v. SHAHEEN BIBI 2009 YLR 1991
• JAFARI & CO. through Muhammad Javed v. TEHSIL MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION (T.M.O.), SHEIKHUPURA 2009 YLR 1994
• LIAQAT alias SAAIN v. State 2009 YLR 1999
• IBRAHIM FIBRES\' LIMITED through Secretary v. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (AUDIT), LARGE TAXPAYER UNIT, LAHORE 2009 PTD 2006
• LAHORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY through Director-General, L.D.A., Lahore v. MUKHTAR AHMED 2009 YLR 2013
• KHIZAR HAYAT v. State 2009 YLR 2016
• MUHAMMAD SALEEM v. State 2009 YLR 2044

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2009 →

online advocate from Sheikhupura lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes