Recovery of money through bank account: notices issued

Lahore High Court (LHC) has issued notices to President of Pakistan, Special Assistant to Prime Minister on Revenue Haroon Akhtar, FBR officials and Government of Punjab in a petition challenging the illegal recovery of money through bank account of a former employee of one of organisations of Punjab government.
Sources told Business Recorder that LHC in a constitutional petition against the President of Pakistan, SA to Prime Minister, FBR employees, a private bank and a Punjab government organisation has issued notices to them. In this case, President has accepted the representation filed by the FBR under section 32 of the Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance, 2000 against an order passed by Federal Tax Ombudsman (FTO).
It is learnt that petition was moved by a former employee of a Punjab government organisation through Waheed Shahzad Butt Advocate, challenging the acceptance of representation by the President against the order passed by FTO Chaudhry Abdur Rauf, stating that act of office of President is patently illegal and recovery of tax is unconstitutional.
The petitioner states: "Respondent banker informed that total life time savings available in the bank account have been remitted to ACIR. Not a single notice/intimation was ever issued by the ACIR/CIR to the petitioner for this patently illegal and unconstitutional activity of snatching of funds. As per record, a sales tax demand was created against the Punjab government organisation. The petitioner approached the CIR/ACIR for seeking refund of his funds, illegally and unconstitutionally snatched but of no avail. Despite repeated visits and long illegal silence, snatched money was not returned.
The petitioner accused that it transpires that IRS officials working in the RTO, Lahore are involved in flouting the fiscal laws, which is not only severe mal-administration of justice but also wastage of precious exchequer resources (taxpayer''''s money) in futile litigation, while it also proves that supervisory authority is not performing its functions to monitor the patently illegal actions of the IRS functionaries. Therefore, a categorical complaint was forwarded to the FTO. Quite surprisingly during the course of investigation before FTO, the respondents adopted a novel stance that name of the petitioner has been appearing as 20% partner and recovery was rightly made. The stance of the respondents is a practical joke of the century, as how a paid employee can be a partner of 20% in a project owned by the government of the Punjab, the petitioner asked.
The petitioner accused that the ACIR intentionally issued a patently illegal notice to the bank wherein the petitioner has been posed as "proprietor" of Punjab government. This state of affairs sufficiently unmasks the real story between the lines what is going on there in the FBR under the supervision of the SA to PM. After detailed hearing, judicious findings have been recorded by the FTO. Said order was challenged before the President. Respondent''''s challenge to the FTO''''s jurisdiction is misconceived. Assessment per se is not really an issue in the matter/complaint before the FTO, at any point of time. Of course FBR has every right to file a representation.
However, the FBR does not have a right to distort/misstate/misrepresent facts before the President and this is precisely what FBR has done in the case presently before the President for which respondents must be held responsible for cheating, false statement and dishonesty (respondent is representative of PM on revenue matters, hence, he must be fully aware of the black and white of the Revenue Division employees), the petitioner added.
The petitioner further accused that it appears officials representing office of the President are not following the mandate to diagnose, investigate, redress and rectify any injustice done to a person through maladministration of tax employees administering tax laws. Sections 12, 13 and 14 of the FTO Ordinance, 2000 give ample powers to the FTO to initiate appropriate corrective action or disciplinary/criminal proceedings against a tax employee who in the opinion of the FTO has committed "maladministration." It is the prime duty of office of the President to dispense justice and functionaries representing office of the learned President are supposed to uphold the dignity of law and respect command and orders of the courts. On the other hand, due to illegal acceptance of representations, the process of law is being abused badly by the office of the President, the petitioner claimed.
The counsel stated that the petitioner was an employee of respondent (Punjab Government organisation) and therefore, could not be held liable for the tax liability pending against the respondent. The counsel stated that Federal Tax Ombudsman while recognising this right of the petitioner in the appeal reversed the findings. The counsel stated that remedy of appeal was not available to the petitioner as there was no tax liability adjudged against the petitioner.
The LHC ordered to issue notices to the respondents for 17.01.2017 to file report and para-wise comments on or before the said date.