2008 PLP 411 (PTD)
Messrs ZAVERIA ENTERPRISES, KARACHI Versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD
| Citation | 2008 PLP 411 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Federal Tax Ombudsman |
| Bench Members | Justice (Retd.) Saleem Akhtar, Federal Tax Ombudsman |
| Parties | Messrs ZAVERIA ENTERPRISES, KARACHI Versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD |
| Primary Law | Customs Act (IV of 1969) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 411 (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Customs Act (IV of 1969) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 PLP 411 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Federal Tax Ombudsman bench comprising: Justice (Retd.) Saleem Akhtar, Federal Tax Ombudsman.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP 411 (PTD) (Messrs ZAVERIA ENTERPRISES, KARACHI Versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Aleem Khan, Advocate.
- 2. Mr. Aleem Khan, Advocate, attended the hearing on 6-10-2003 and stated that the supplementary claims of 1992 to 1994 were available with the Department but they were verbally told that there was a ban on processing and sanction of supplementary claims. He informed that after filing the complaint in the Federal Tax Ombudsman Secretariat and issue of the notices by this office, the Complainants received a letter dated 1-10-2003 from the Assistant Collector of Customs requesting for submission of duplicate supplementary claims. They furnished duplicate documents of 75 supplementary claims to the Department on 4-10-2003. The Deputy Collector stated that the Department has already requested for some time to submit parawise comments. She added that since the duplicate claims have been received, the same would be decided at the earliest.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss.35, 36 & 37
Custom General Order 12 of 2002, para.52
Establishment of Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXXV of 2000), S.2(3)
Drawback
Non-settlement of supplementary claims pending since 1992 to 1994
Since the Complainant had already filed duplicate documents of the 75 supplementary claims and the Deputy Collector had promised to process and decide the same as early as possible
Federal Tax Ombudsman recommended that Central Board of Revenue direct the Collector of Customs to decide the supplementary claims within thirty days and depute staff to prepare a list of all pending supplementary claims and furnish the same to this office within two months. M. Mubeen Ahsan, Dealing Officer. Aleem Khan, Advocate. Ms. Zeba Ahmed, Deputy Collector of Customs (Exports).
Judgment & Decree
Aleem Khan, Advocate. Ms. Zeba Ahmed, Deputy Collector of Customs (Exports). FINDINGS/DECISION JUSTICE (RETD.) SALEEM AKHTAR (FEDERAL TAX OMBUDSMAN).
The complaint has been filed for non-settlement of supplementary claims pending since 1992 to 1994. The Complainants have submitted a list of 75 supplementary claims in the complaint and stated that these claims were filed on dates shown against each in 1992, 1993 and 1994. They sent reminders dated 12-8-1994, 1-1-1995, 2-12-2000, 26-4-2003 and 30-6-2003 but no action was taken. On inquiry they were verbally informed that the claims were missing and not traceable. They requested that the Collector be directed to dispose of the pending supplementary claims in the light of paragraph 52 of C.G.O. 12/2002. In response to the complaint, C.B.R. forwarded a copy of the Collector of Customs (Exports) letter dated 9-9-2003 requesting for extension of the time limit for submission of the parawise comments up to 13-10-2003.
2. Mr. Aleem Khan, Advocate, attended the hearing on 6-10-2003 and stated that the supplementary claims of 1992 to 1994 were available with the Department but they were verbally told that there was a ban on processing and sanction of supplementary claims. He informed that after filing the complaint in the Federal Tax Ombudsman Secretariat and issue of the notices by this office, the Complainants received a letter dated 1-10-2003 from the Assistant Collector of Customs requesting for submission of duplicate supplementary claims. They furnished duplicate documents of 75 supplementary claims to the Department on 4-10-2003. The Deputy Collector stated that the Department has already requested for some time to submit parawise comments. She added that since the duplicate claims have been received, the same would be decided at the earliest.
3. Since the Complainants have already filed duplicate documents of the 75 supplementary claims and the Deputy Collector has promised to process and decide the same as early as possible, it is recommended that C.B.R. direct the Collector of Customs to (i) decide the supplementary claims within thirty days; and (ii) depute staff to prepare a list of all pending supplementary claims and furnish the same to this office within two months. (iii) Compliance of (i) be reported within forty-five days and of (ii) within two months. C.M.A/15/FTO Order accordingly.