Find a Lawyer

MAHER TEXTILE MILLS LTD. versus CENTRAL BOARD OF REVENUE

Excise Duty on Production Capacity (Cotton Fabric) Rules 1988 R 5 Claim excise duty due to reduction in production. The applicant claims that the claim for his elimination was decided by the authorities through an unclean order which was approved on a non-farm basis. The applicant considered several grounds in support of his claim of excise duty reduction, adopting a uniform and default formula and applying it in the case of the applicant which resulted in the applicant Was advocated by Grounds in support of its claim of termination. Excise duty was justified by the authorities but only one ground was allowed, namely, that the mill worked for two shifts instead of three shifts, and on all other grounds, which allowed the excise duty to be reduced. Loss of productivity and loss of excise duty claimed were not considered, remand for the Lout Authority case was received and the respondents were instructed to re-hear the matter and to comply with the law. Determine the excise duty reduction claim for the relevant period after the foundations are laid. registration advocate from Deh Pathaan lawyer