Find a Lawyer

CHENAB LIMITED THROUGH DIRECTOR versus COLLECTOR OF SALES TAX, FAISALABAD

Refunds were issued under Section 45A, 66 and 67 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitution Petition for Withholding Refund, but the applicant / reviewer Part of the borrower's claim was prevented by the authorities from saying that it was due to a dispute that the matter between the declared weight of the goods imported and the actual weight was sent to the CBR, which requested Confirmed the return claim, but nevertheless, the AC (Refund) issued a showcase notice to the applicant stating that the applicant's claim for return was acceptable. Not against this order, which the Collector (Appeal) accepted and the pending order set aside, the order passed in the appeal had been finalized as no further appeal had been filed against it. But nevertheless, the authorities denied the applicant's claim and again, issuing notice to the applicant, decided in clear and unambiguous terms by the Collector (Appeal), which was confirmed by the CBR with a clear directive. That the reference by the Collector was unapproved and that after the order had reached the deadline, there was no delay in the execution of the petitioner's return request. The High Court directed that the refund amount be paid. Refund should be issued to the applicant after reviewing the actual facts related to the calculation. General Chat Chat Lounge n jobs for fresh advocates from Guddu lawyer