AGL 40.12 Decreased By ▼ -0.04 (-0.1%)
AIRLINK 131.27 Decreased By ▼ -0.46 (-0.35%)
BOP 6.68 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.15%)
CNERGY 4.56 Increased By ▲ 0.09 (2.01%)
DCL 9.00 Increased By ▲ 0.18 (2.04%)
DFML 41.16 Increased By ▲ 0.55 (1.35%)
DGKC 84.86 Increased By ▲ 0.78 (0.93%)
FCCL 32.68 Increased By ▲ 0.34 (1.05%)
FFBL 75.47 Increased By ▲ 6.86 (10%)
FFL 11.58 Increased By ▲ 0.23 (2.03%)
HUBC 110.50 Decreased By ▼ -1.26 (-1.13%)
HUMNL 14.31 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
KEL 5.25 Increased By ▲ 0.03 (0.57%)
KOSM 8.80 Decreased By ▼ -0.18 (-2%)
MLCF 39.35 Decreased By ▼ -0.08 (-0.2%)
NBP 60.95 Increased By ▲ 0.66 (1.09%)
OGDC 196.25 Increased By ▲ 1.31 (0.67%)
PAEL 26.90 Increased By ▲ 0.21 (0.79%)
PIBTL 7.52 Increased By ▲ 0.04 (0.53%)
PPL 156.55 Increased By ▲ 0.78 (0.5%)
PRL 26.97 Increased By ▲ 0.29 (1.09%)
PTC 18.20 Decreased By ▼ -0.10 (-0.55%)
SEARL 82.41 Decreased By ▼ -0.61 (-0.73%)
TELE 8.38 Increased By ▲ 0.15 (1.82%)
TOMCL 34.69 Increased By ▲ 0.14 (0.41%)
TPLP 9.16 Increased By ▲ 0.35 (3.97%)
TREET 17.36 Increased By ▲ 0.66 (3.95%)
TRG 62.20 Decreased By ▼ -0.25 (-0.4%)
UNITY 27.62 Increased By ▲ 0.18 (0.66%)
WTL 1.37 Increased By ▲ 0.09 (7.03%)
BR100 10,403 Increased By 216.3 (2.12%)
BR30 31,560 Increased By 223.6 (0.71%)
KSE100 97,226 Increased By 1679.5 (1.76%)
KSE30 30,175 Increased By 596.8 (2.02%)

ISLAMABAD: The Federal Tax Ombudsman (FTO) has taken notice of the harsh treatment of the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) to an old lady (senior citizen) by issuing multiple notices and ex-parte orders against her for the past many years.

An old lady and a compliant taxpayer before Tax Ombudsman was burdened with multiple notices for audit for the Tax Year 2016. She was engaged in textile manufacturing business, final showcause notice for compliance was issued.

However, the complainant applied for an extension which was rejected and an ex-parte order was passed creating demand of Rs2.7 million.

However, all the relevant details of purchases and expenses were not only filed but also duly examined by the officer but the ex-parte order was passed without considering the details available on record.

The complainant being aggrieved, took up the matter with the FTO.

In response, the chief commissioner–IR contended that the case of the complainant was selected under Section 214C of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001. Subsequently, the ACIR issued notice to produce records for the purpose of audit but the taxpayer did not fulfill its statutory duty. However, in order to provide another opportunity to the taxpayer, show cause notice was issued. As the taxpayer failed to make any compliance, the order was passed under Section 121(1) on the basis of failure to provide explanation.

According to the findings of the FTO, the issue was not assessment of income and determination of tax liability.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2022

Comments

Comments are closed.