Law: Central Excise Act, (I of 1944)

Section: 1(3),3D(3)

Law: Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance, 2000

Section: 2(3)(i)(a)

(Central Excise Act (I of 1944)]......Ss 1(3) & 3-D(3)---S.R.O.(I)/99 dated 1-7-1999 & S.R.O. 805(I)/99 dated 15-7-1999--Establishment of Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXXV of 2000), S.2(3)(i)(a)---Imposition of excise duty---Withdrawal of excise duty---Contrary to law---Refund---Excise duty was imposed by S.R.O.(I)99, dated 1-7-1999 on manufacturers at Gadoon Amazi and it was withdrawn by S.R.O. 805(I)/99, dated 15-7-1999 with effect from 1-7-1999---Complainants had deposited Rs.1,00,000 in advance and their request for refund was accepted to the extent of Rs.19,780 and the claim of Rs.80,219 was rejected---Validity---Incidence of tax had not passed to the consumers---Complainants had produced documentary evidence, which was official document---Excise duty paid was not included in the value for purposes of calculating sales tax---Invoice was in the name of customers mentioned in the official document---Process adopted in rejecting the claim without hearing the complainants and without properly examining the evidence on record was contrary to law---Decision was made arbitrarily only on presumptions and not on evidence on record---Tax Ombudsman ordered the refund of Rs.80,219 be paid within 30 days. ORDER JUSTICE (RETD.) SALEEM AKHTAR (FEDERAL TAX OMBUDSMAN).---The complainants are manufacturers at Gadoon Amazi. The excise duty was imposed by S.R.O.(I)/99, dated 1-7-1999 in pursuance of which they deposited in advance Rs.100,000. Subsequently the notification dated 1-7-1999 referred above was suspended till 31-7-1999 and ultimately by S.R.O. No.805(I)99 dated 15-7-1999 it was withdrawn w.e.f. 1-7-1999. The complainants filed application for refund of Rs.100,000 on 7-8-1999. Along with the application they submitted the bills with full details in support of their claim. The Adjudicating Officer by order, dated 17-11-2003 ordered for refund of Rs.19,780 and rejected the claim of Rs.80,219 on the ground that the incidence of tax duly has been passed on to the customer. The complainants have alleged that no hearing was afforded to them and the order was passed in contravention of law, rules and instructions of C.B.R. 2. The department in its…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492