Some field formations of the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) are defying the orders of the Federal Tax Ombudsman (FTO) and making fresh assessment of taxpayers without first implementing the unchallenged FTO recommendations. Sources told Business Recorder here on Saturday that some field formations are not only involved in defiance of orders issued by the FTO but are also disobeying the binding instructions issued by their parent agency "FBR".
In this regard FBR has issued binding instructions to its field formations vide C No1(337)S(TO-II)/2013 dated 23-1-2014 and C.No 1(11)CSTRO/FBR/2013 dated 25-9-2013. When contacted, a Lahore-based lawyer Waheed Shahzad Butt told this correspondent that the office of the FTO proved to be of great help in redressal of genuine grievances and hardship of the aggrieved taxpayers as a result of maladministration of justice and corrupt practices on the part of the revenue division employees.
Tax lawyer added that the President of Pakistan while disposing of FBR's representations against FTO's recommendations for issuance of due refunds, has invariably directed that no action may be taken by FBR before first implementing the FTO's recommendations. FBR too has strictly directed field formations, in writing, to fully implement the FTO's recommendations in such cases within the time given in the FTO's order and not to take any other action without first doing so.
Under the provisions of FTO Ordinance, 2000, FTO makes time bound findings/recommendations through his order disposing of complaints, thereafter concerned Advisers (I&M) monitor the process of implementation. FBR has also directed its field officials, in writing, not to delay the issuance of refund under any pretext in cases where the FTO or any competent Court, has directed that refund be issued even if that entails 'breaking the queue.'
Explaining the provisions of Federal Ombudsman Institutional Reforms Act, 2013 (FOIRA), Waheed Butt said that it was the primary statutory responsibility on the part of FBR functionaries to implement the unchallenged FTO's recommendations, where the department had neither filed any Review Application before FTO nor preferred any Representation before the President against the FTO and so as a consequence, FTO's order had attained finality. However, some field formations are not only involved in defiance of orders issued by FTO but they are also disobeying the binding instructions issued by their parent agency "FBR". In this regard, Waheed referred to FBR's instructions issued vide C No1(337)S(TO-II)/2013 dated 23-1-2014 and C.No 1(11)CSTRO/FBR/2013 dated 25-9-2013 which stipulates that "When the findings/recommendations attain finality, then fresh assessment cannot be made without first implementing the recommendations.
In case of other important hot issue of "Queue Breaking", the following instructions have been issued by the FBR to field formations "...claims warranting immediate processing on account of Court/FTO Orders shall be given priority in the queue...". Breaking the queue has been expressly desired by the FBR in Court/FTO's cases and these instructions are binding on all FBR functionaries under all fiscal statutes but some officials are grossly violating the binding instructions with some ulterior motives.
Tax lawyer also referred a test case wherein unchallenged recommendations issued by the FTO remained unimplemented despite lapse of more than one year, while the refund claim was pending for the last 14 years. In Complaint No 281/2013 pertaining to RTO-I Lahore, for the last one decade, a senior citizen of 71 years of age is running from pillar to post to seek his lawful right of refund even after having unchallenged recommendations issued by FTO. However, due to strict lawful intervention by the Adviser (I&M) Lahore, Refund Payment Orders (RPO) for partial claim pertaining to years 2000 and 2001 have been issued by RTO Lahore on 06.06.2014. The balance claims of lawful refunds are still pending on flimsy grounds, however, the RPO so issued also remained un-cashed by the FBR without any lawful excuse. This state of affairs reflects only one thing what is meaning of resistance when there is issue of returning taxpayer's money in shape of refunds and even when there is intervention by FTO.
Instructions issued by the FBR are binding on all functionaries but they failed to follow the same in the cited case. The IRS officials should be held accountable for non-observance of binding instructions and non-compliance thereof should be treated as misconduct and the defaulting officers must be proceeded against under Efficiency and Discipline Rules, Waheed added.
Comments
Comments are closed.