ISLAMABAD: The Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue (ATIR) Islamabad has issued an order against an overseas Pakistani by dismissing his appeal merely on the ground that affidavit/appeal contains electronically scanned signature.
In this regard, a two-member bench of the ATIR Division Bench-I has issued an order in favour of the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR).
Taxpayers including tax advisers have termed this order of the ATIR as very harsh for the non-residential individuals, who cannot send manually signed documents or handwritten signatures from abroad.
Resident Pakistanis in UAE, UK: Rental income, capital gain not taxable: ATIR DB
The ATIR order is legal but they have requested the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) to immediately amend the law to accept the electronically scanned signatures of overseas Pakistanis while filing an appeal before the ATIR.
The non-resident persons or overseas Pakistani have to bear an additional cost of international courier company for sending manually signed signature before the appeal.
The FBR must consider the genuine grievances of the overseas taxpayers and non-resident Pakistanis particularly in the matter of exercising their first right of filing of appeals, they added.
The tribunal has dismissed an appeal filed by a non-resident taxpayer against audit selection, who filed an affidavit/appeal with electronically scanned signature.
According to an order of the ATIR, the Power of Attorney (POA) annexed with the appeal, which is also signed using a scanned signature, does not explicitly authorize the said chartered accountant firm to file the appeal on behalf of the appellant.
According to the prescribed procedure, the appeal must be filed by the appellant personally, bearing their handwritten signature and verification; otherwise, it cannot be considered properly filed by the aggrieved person. In response, the taxpayers’ representative explained that the appellant is a non-resident, currently residing abroad and rendering services outside Pakistan for several years.
The relevant facts indicated that the taxpayer, an individual, filed an electronic return of income for the tax year under consideration, declaring an income of Rs 9,285,590. This return was deemed an original assessment under Section 120(1) of the Income Tax Ordinance. However, the Federal Board of Revenue, exercising its powers under Section 214C of the Ordinance, selected the taxpayer’s case for audit, with intimation provided via the IRIS system.
In response, the taxpayer submitted an online reply on March 15,2024, along with supporting documents, which were found unsatisfactory.
Consequently, an order under Section 122(1) of the Ordinance was passed on May 20, 2024. Feeling aggrieved by this order, the appellant has now approached this Tribunal, challenging the impugned order on multiple grounds.
The Authorized Representative (AR) for the appellant was confronted with the issue that the appeal, along with the miscellaneous applications, had been filed using an electronically scanned signature of the appellant, which is not permissible under the law.
The ATIR order said that while the power of attorney (POA) authorizes the said chartered accountant company to represent the appellant, engage in proceedings, present arguments, and collect the appellate order, it does not expressly empower them to file an appeal. Filing an appeal is a distinct legal act and must be explicitly authorized in the POA.
Moreover, it is noted that the appeal was not filed within the prescribed time. The appellant submitted an application for condonation of delay along with an affidavit.
However, both the application and the affidavit bear scanned signatures of the appellant.
Additionally, it is noted that the appellant, being a non-resident, is currently out of the country. Despite this, the POA is signed by two witnesses and attested/authenticated by Notary Public, Islamabad.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Comments