Find a Lawyer

HANIF STRAW BOARD FACTORY THROUGH PROPRIETOR versus ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR (ADJUDICATION), CUSTOMS, CENTRAL EXCISE AND SALES TAX, GUJRANWALA

Section 11, 36 and 47 of the Sales Tax Assistance Payment High Court default reference showcase notice was issued stating that it made a mistake in paying the tax, but according to the showcase notice, however, for different years Assisi's money distribution is lacking. It challenged the show cause notice; that time was withheld; this department had passed an order beyond the limit set by law and committed further default. And that the tribunal failed to recognize that the small amount paid was that of another Assisi, who had another unit in the premises and was willing to pay the same assertion of the Assisi which was ignored and In case of money withholding, money was considered as default and restriction. The clearance of the goods from the premises of the business premises was the same as the claim of the SC that remained in the showcase notice for the initial two years, except that the notice was delayed by a delay of four years as well at a later stage. The amount was not distributed, the additional collector's action was not appropriate to correct the illegal. The actual showcase notice remained illegal; no notice could be made which was illegal and his face was banned by the department for a period of 45 days. After more than the order was placed. According to the law, the whole process was temporarily halted, which had to set aside illicit matters which no one could agree with. He advised the Department on the status of the showcase notice. Was placed on the sidelines and the reference request was dealt with accordingly \ r \ n list of supreme court advocates from Kazi Ahmed lawyer