AIRLINK 177.75 Decreased By ▼ -4.96 (-2.71%)
BOP 10.05 Decreased By ▼ -0.40 (-3.83%)
CNERGY 8.18 Decreased By ▼ -0.25 (-2.97%)
CPHL 92.48 Decreased By ▼ -1.73 (-1.84%)
FCCL 45.93 Decreased By ▼ -0.35 (-0.76%)
FFL 15.85 Decreased By ▼ -0.33 (-2.04%)
FLYNG 28.10 Decreased By ▼ -0.45 (-1.58%)
HUBC 141.80 Decreased By ▼ -3.98 (-2.73%)
HUMNL 12.83 Decreased By ▼ -0.20 (-1.53%)
KEL 4.35 Decreased By ▼ -0.06 (-1.36%)
KOSM 5.91 Increased By ▲ 0.12 (2.07%)
MLCF 66.30 Decreased By ▼ -1.00 (-1.49%)
OGDC 213.65 Increased By ▲ 0.37 (0.17%)
PACE 6.00 Decreased By ▼ -0.08 (-1.32%)
PAEL 46.00 Decreased By ▼ -1.84 (-3.85%)
PIAHCLA 17.59 Decreased By ▼ -0.20 (-1.12%)
PIBTL 9.76 Decreased By ▼ -0.16 (-1.61%)
POWER 14.23 Decreased By ▼ -0.03 (-0.21%)
PPL 169.75 Decreased By ▼ -0.91 (-0.53%)
PRL 33.28 Decreased By ▼ -0.72 (-2.12%)
PTC 21.64 Decreased By ▼ -0.59 (-2.65%)
SEARL 93.50 Decreased By ▼ -1.54 (-1.62%)
SSGC 40.96 Decreased By ▼ -1.14 (-2.71%)
SYM 15.40 Decreased By ▼ -0.21 (-1.35%)
TELE 7.72 Increased By ▲ 0.25 (3.35%)
TPLP 9.90 Decreased By ▼ -0.09 (-0.9%)
TRG 66.82 Decreased By ▼ -0.07 (-0.1%)
WAVESAPP 9.86 Decreased By ▼ -0.02 (-0.2%)
WTL 1.34 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.74%)
YOUW 3.83 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
AIRLINK 177.75 Decreased By ▼ -4.96 (-2.71%)
BOP 10.05 Decreased By ▼ -0.40 (-3.83%)
CNERGY 8.18 Decreased By ▼ -0.25 (-2.97%)
CPHL 92.48 Decreased By ▼ -1.73 (-1.84%)
FCCL 45.93 Decreased By ▼ -0.35 (-0.76%)
FFL 15.85 Decreased By ▼ -0.33 (-2.04%)
FLYNG 28.10 Decreased By ▼ -0.45 (-1.58%)
HUBC 141.80 Decreased By ▼ -3.98 (-2.73%)
HUMNL 12.83 Decreased By ▼ -0.20 (-1.53%)
KEL 4.35 Decreased By ▼ -0.06 (-1.36%)
KOSM 5.91 Increased By ▲ 0.12 (2.07%)
MLCF 66.30 Decreased By ▼ -1.00 (-1.49%)
OGDC 213.65 Increased By ▲ 0.37 (0.17%)
PACE 6.00 Decreased By ▼ -0.08 (-1.32%)
PAEL 46.00 Decreased By ▼ -1.84 (-3.85%)
PIAHCLA 17.59 Decreased By ▼ -0.20 (-1.12%)
PIBTL 9.76 Decreased By ▼ -0.16 (-1.61%)
POWER 14.23 Decreased By ▼ -0.03 (-0.21%)
PPL 169.75 Decreased By ▼ -0.91 (-0.53%)
PRL 33.28 Decreased By ▼ -0.72 (-2.12%)
PTC 21.64 Decreased By ▼ -0.59 (-2.65%)
SEARL 93.50 Decreased By ▼ -1.54 (-1.62%)
SSGC 40.96 Decreased By ▼ -1.14 (-2.71%)
SYM 15.40 Decreased By ▼ -0.21 (-1.35%)
TELE 7.72 Increased By ▲ 0.25 (3.35%)
TPLP 9.90 Decreased By ▼ -0.09 (-0.9%)
TRG 66.82 Decreased By ▼ -0.07 (-0.1%)
WAVESAPP 9.86 Decreased By ▼ -0.02 (-0.2%)
WTL 1.34 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.74%)
YOUW 3.83 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
BR100 12,511 Decreased By -164.8 (-1.3%)
BR30 37,612 Decreased By -526.6 (-1.38%)
KSE100 117,146 Decreased By -1284.2 (-1.08%)
KSE30 35,982 Decreased By -421.2 (-1.16%)

LAHORE: Seeking record after selecting a group of taxpayers for audit is unlawful, said tax practitioners. They said the practice of doing so was rampant during the time of former Chairman FBR Dr Mohammed Ashfaq Ahmed when tax authorities were involved in selecting taxpayers for audit for various tax periods and calling upon them to produce record and documents for the purpose of audit.

According to them, not only the assessing officers but the competent authorities were also found issuing follow up notices, listing the record and documents required for the audit.

They said most of the notices were issued under sales tax and federal excise act without mentioning any scrutiny of tax returns. Rather, taxpayers were simply informed that they have been selected for audit in exercise of powers under the relevant laws. However, none of the notices has ever assigned reasons for selecting the taxpayers for audit.

According to these circles, most of such notices were challenged in the courts of law on the ground that issuance of notices calling upon to produce record and selecting them for audit at the same time was against the spirit of the law, as no reason was ever assigned to the action by the department.

They further pointed out that issuing notices without giving reasons for audit was arbitrary and amounts to mala fide as well as roving and fishing inquiry into their tax affairs. They said the department was issuing notices mechanically on or about the same time, which meant they were under pressure to do so.

According to the tax experts, the tax laws provide a safeguard to them when it stipulates that the tax authorities would have to give reasons for audit selection. Especially, when this selection was not through computer ballot but carried out manually by the competent authorities.

It may be noted that the authorities of the Inland Revenue Service were found sharing with media the kind of pressure they were facing at the hands of the FBR high-ups. They were also found suggesting the ill-fated taxpayers to approach the courts of law for a remedy against the audit notices.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2024

Comments

Comments are closed.