AGL 38.22 Increased By ▲ 0.07 (0.18%)
AIRLINK 128.97 Increased By ▲ 3.90 (3.12%)
BOP 7.85 Increased By ▲ 1.00 (14.6%)
CNERGY 4.66 Increased By ▲ 0.21 (4.72%)
DCL 8.32 Increased By ▲ 0.41 (5.18%)
DFML 38.94 Increased By ▲ 1.60 (4.28%)
DGKC 81.94 Increased By ▲ 4.17 (5.36%)
FCCL 33.42 Increased By ▲ 2.84 (9.29%)
FFBL 75.71 Increased By ▲ 6.85 (9.95%)
FFL 12.82 Increased By ▲ 0.96 (8.09%)
HUBC 110.36 Increased By ▲ 5.86 (5.61%)
HUMNL 14.01 Increased By ▲ 0.52 (3.85%)
KEL 5.15 Increased By ▲ 0.50 (10.75%)
KOSM 7.67 Increased By ▲ 0.50 (6.97%)
MLCF 39.80 Increased By ▲ 3.36 (9.22%)
NBP 72.32 Increased By ▲ 6.40 (9.71%)
OGDC 188.29 Increased By ▲ 8.76 (4.88%)
PAEL 25.63 Increased By ▲ 1.20 (4.91%)
PIBTL 7.37 Increased By ▲ 0.22 (3.08%)
PPL 152.67 Increased By ▲ 8.97 (6.24%)
PRL 25.39 Increased By ▲ 1.07 (4.4%)
PTC 17.70 Increased By ▲ 1.30 (7.93%)
SEARL 82.42 Increased By ▲ 3.85 (4.9%)
TELE 7.59 Increased By ▲ 0.37 (5.12%)
TOMCL 32.57 Increased By ▲ 0.60 (1.88%)
TPLP 8.42 Increased By ▲ 0.29 (3.57%)
TREET 16.78 Increased By ▲ 0.65 (4.03%)
TRG 56.04 Increased By ▲ 1.38 (2.52%)
UNITY 28.78 Increased By ▲ 1.28 (4.65%)
WTL 1.35 Increased By ▲ 0.06 (4.65%)
BR100 10,659 No Change 0 (0%)
BR30 31,331 No Change 0 (0%)
KSE100 100,059 Increased By 790 (0.8%)
KSE30 31,285 Increased By 252.7 (0.81%)

ISLAMABAD: The Lahore High Court (LHC) has declared that the orders of the Federal Tax Ombudsman (FTO) can only be challenged before the President of Pakistan.

The LHC has dismissed writ petition against orders of the FTO while deciding the matter of the FTO’s jurisdiction in writ petition No 20123-22 and other two associated petitions.

The LHC has held that the FTO’s orders can only be challenged before the President.

As per details, the LHC’s order stated that complaints filed before the FTO, under section 10(1), regarding delay in refund, were adjudicated, after receiving para wise comments and hearing both sides that the refund application of petitioner, in terms of section 170(4) of Income Tax Ordinance 2001, had already been disposed of vide Bar code order 27.10.2020 and a legal remedy of appeal was available under section 127 of the Ordinance, which complainant did not avail.

Maladministration in FBR: FTO has authority to conduct inspection

Review filed with the FTO by petitioner was also dismissed on the above mentioned ground.

The LHC further held that “Review Orders” of the FTO, declining to revisit his earlier orders, appears to be reasonable, which, prima facie, does not require any interference.

The court further held that the FTO’s order could only be challenged in representation with the president and this statutory remedy was never availed by the petitioner.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2022

Comments

Comments are closed.