AGL 38.02 Increased By ▲ 0.08 (0.21%)
AIRLINK 197.36 Increased By ▲ 3.45 (1.78%)
BOP 9.54 Increased By ▲ 0.22 (2.36%)
CNERGY 5.91 Increased By ▲ 0.07 (1.2%)
DCL 8.82 Increased By ▲ 0.14 (1.61%)
DFML 35.74 Decreased By ▼ -0.72 (-1.97%)
DGKC 96.86 Increased By ▲ 4.32 (4.67%)
FCCL 35.25 Increased By ▲ 1.28 (3.77%)
FFBL 88.94 Increased By ▲ 6.64 (8.07%)
FFL 13.17 Increased By ▲ 0.42 (3.29%)
HUBC 127.55 Increased By ▲ 6.94 (5.75%)
HUMNL 13.50 Decreased By ▼ -0.10 (-0.74%)
KEL 5.32 Increased By ▲ 0.10 (1.92%)
KOSM 7.00 Increased By ▲ 0.48 (7.36%)
MLCF 44.70 Increased By ▲ 2.59 (6.15%)
NBP 61.42 Increased By ▲ 1.61 (2.69%)
OGDC 214.67 Increased By ▲ 3.50 (1.66%)
PAEL 38.79 Increased By ▲ 1.21 (3.22%)
PIBTL 8.25 Increased By ▲ 0.18 (2.23%)
PPL 193.08 Increased By ▲ 2.76 (1.45%)
PRL 38.66 Increased By ▲ 0.49 (1.28%)
PTC 25.80 Increased By ▲ 2.35 (10.02%)
SEARL 103.60 Increased By ▲ 5.66 (5.78%)
TELE 8.30 Increased By ▲ 0.08 (0.97%)
TOMCL 35.00 Decreased By ▼ -0.03 (-0.09%)
TPLP 13.30 Decreased By ▼ -0.25 (-1.85%)
TREET 22.16 Decreased By ▼ -0.57 (-2.51%)
TRG 55.59 Increased By ▲ 2.72 (5.14%)
UNITY 32.97 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.03%)
WTL 1.60 Increased By ▲ 0.08 (5.26%)
BR100 11,727 Increased By 342.7 (3.01%)
BR30 36,377 Increased By 1165.1 (3.31%)
KSE100 109,513 Increased By 3238.2 (3.05%)
KSE30 34,513 Increased By 1160.1 (3.48%)

LAHORE: Federal Tax Ombudsman (FTO) Dr Asif Mahmood Jah has expressed strong concerns over the repeated thrashing of the same issue to delay refund claims triggered by the taxpayer’s request and termed it a classic example of maladministration on the part of the tax department.

“It is a typical case of maladministration when the department has already discussed and thrashed out an issue, but still the same is being subjected to further queries leading to delaying the issuance of a refund,” he stressed.

According to details, the taxpayer is a private limited company deriving income from the manufacturing of other electrical equipment.

The department amended u/s 122(1) in the 2020 tax year by creating a refund of Rs 8,513,309. However, the department issued no refund even after a lapse of more than seven months.

The taxpayer approached the FTO, but the department maintained that the genuineness of the claim was yet to be verified. The department further mentioned having consulted customs data.

However, the FTO pointed out in his order that it is not understandable what other customs data is yet to be scrutinized by the department after the release of goods by the Customs after due diligence.

It is a typical case of maladministration that an issue has already been discussed and thrashed out. However, still the same is being subjected to further queries, leading to delaying the issuance of refund, the FTO stressed.

According to the FTO, The taxpayer was confronted by the department to provide documentary evidence concerning the addition of fixed assets. The taxpayer company had declared an addition of fixed assets in the income tax return for the tax year 2020.

The balance declared during the tax year was duly recorded in the fixed asset register. The addition was made through proper banking channels and can be traced through GDs and purchase invoices. A copy of GDs and purchase invoices were provided for consideration, which was also verified during the audit proceedings.

Finally, the FTO issued a clear directive to the concerned CIR Zone-IV, CTO, Lahore to promptly dispose of the taxpayer’s refund claim.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2024

Comments

Comments are closed.