FAZAL TEXTILE MILLS LIMITED, KARACHI versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD
Section 81 (2) and 32 Office of the Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXV of 2000), Section 3 and 9 (2) (b) Customs General Order No. 2002, paragraph, 66 section R530 (I) / 2005, Date 6 6 2005 Section RO 70 (I) / 2005, dated 3 4 2006 Temporary review of duty waiver was denied on the basis that imported parts were not an integral part of the machinery, post-check after the goods were deferred. Security was released, with one explanation remaining. From the Central Board of Revenue, whether the aforementioned parts were part of the textile machinery, for the final assessment within the prescribed period under section 81 (2) of the Customs Act, 1969, the post-dated check was considered as a trust The customs department will finalize the matter in a timely manner. The complainant continued to pursue the matter to finalize the temporary commitment and requested the release of the security department, which neither issued security nor had regular inspections within it. Order passed by. The Fixed Term Department claimed that the explanation was received from the Central Board of Revenue in January, 2006 and April 2006 and since the goods were included in the negative list, the sales tax was imposed due to which the postal check was terminated and Additional duty and tax demand was increased. Accuracy If the Department was of the view that the Central Board of Revenue had a provisional evaluation document received in January and April 2006, it was the duty of the customs authorities to make the assessment within the period set out under section 81 ( Finalize). 2) The Customs Act, 1969 was not done and consequently the provisional assessment was finalized under Section 81 (4) of the Customs Act, 1969, to be returned to the Post Date Checker.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
