Find a Lawyer

ADAM SUGAR MILLS LIMITED THROUGH DIRECTOR versus CUSTOMS, FEDERAL EXCISE AND SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, LAHORE

Section 194A, 194B & 194Constitution Pakistan (1973), Article 199 In the Petition of Appeal, rejecting the technical-based appeal, the petitioner challenged two orders of the appellate tribunal, through which the first tribunal applied. The appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed. For illegal prosecution, while the application for restoration of the appeal was dismissed by a second order, the Council's Revenue requested that since the applicant failed to appear, the Tribunal had the legal right to Eliminate your appeal to an illegal prosecuting attorney for the applicant. However, denying the facts of service of Section 194B of the Customs Act, 1969, it was clear that the appellate tribunal was required to provide the parties with an opportunity to be heard for appeal and to pass such orders as it could confirm, Editing would be appropriate. Or the decision may be canceled or appealed against the order or before the order of the case may be passed and the case may be sent to the authority. The basic provisions of section 194B of the Customs Act, 1969 cannot be interpreted in any other way. Except that the Tribunal was able to confirm, amend, enforce, as well as seek remand for the appealed order against him, which would have been possible only after giving the reason for settlement. The appeal of illegal prosecution was not understandable in the main provisions of section 194B of the Customs Act, 1969. In addition to the order imposed to dismiss the appeal of the illegal prosecution, the second order also refused to restore the appeal. Which was set aside by the High Court. Consequently, the appeal filed by the applicant tax advocates from Diamer lawyer