TRADECOM PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD. THROUGH EXECUTIVE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (FINANCE) versus DEPUTY COLLECTOR CUSTOMS, CFS DRY PORT
Sections 80 and 196 were imported by Section R4444 (I) / 04, dated 12 6 2004 and CGO 12/02 Imported Value Assessment Vehicle Diplomat which sold it to the applicant complain of the applicant. The customs officials misidentified the import price. The validity of the vehicle for the purposes of duty and taxation was supported by the declared value / all necessary documents, except for the sale of the vehicle by foreigners. I had neither the opportunity nor the authorities to justify the rejection of the duty within three years of the import / mission import. And other taxes to be taxed at the import price, with no legal justification for raising the price of income or paying duty and tax at the prevailing rate. The appraisal High Court directed the authorities to leave the vehicle after receiving 100 duty duty and tax at the declared and accepted price in foreign currency. According to notification section R 447 (I) / 2004, the vehicle's import date, 2 2 2004, reference was allowed \ r \ n
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
