Sections 22, 118 and 239 (10) FBR Circular No. 20 dated 1992 1992 Correction of error 1 7 1992 Dismissal of 20% local sale of Export Local Cell Exporters was denied as the appellate tribunal observed that the notification , The Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, which was inconsistent with the same clause of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001, was repealed under notices, orders or rules. And since Section 18 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, said that local business was to be taxed under common law, circular reliance on the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 was inconsistent because it was not applicable. , Which had the advantage of Circular No. 20 of 1992. About 20% of the exporters' direction of offering local sales as export sales was denied, despite the fact that it was still intact and very much in existence and still in the field. That the Constitution guarantees the equal protection of the law between persons who were equitably protected and that such persons have equal rights and cannot be discriminated against and discriminated against. In many cases, this department had declared local sales of exporters as export sales, collecting taxes on local sales and in the present case would be nothing but discrimination, there is no doubt that 20% of exporters to the circular. Directed to treat local sales as exports. The sale was still in the field, counting that the Circular / Directive issued by the Federal Board of Revenue was not binding on the Appellate Tribunal's circular in the questioning statute.
