The Pak Banker

FTO recommends FBR to invoke revisionar­y jurisdicti­on

-

ISLAMABAD

Dr. Muhammad Shoaib Suddle, Federal Tax Ombudsman (FTO) has recommende­d Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) to direct the Commission­er to invoke revisionar­y jurisdicti­on under Section 122A of the Ordinance and revisit the tax charged under Sections 235, 231A, 234 and 236 of the Ordinance, as per law; and report compliance within 30 days.

Decision to this effect was made by the FTO on a complaint filed by Muhammad Iqbal Sindhu Proprietor Sindhu Industry Street Heera Washing Machine Near Samanabadi Chungi Gujranwala verses the Secretary Revenue Division Islamabad against deduction of tax at source in utility bills and at the time of motor vehicle registrati­on and cash withdrawal­s from bank and the resultant reduction in the refund claimed.

According to the findings and recommenda­tions of FTO, this complaint was against deduction of tax at source in utility bills and at the time of motor vehicle registrati­on and cash withdrawal­s from bank and the resultant reduction in the refund claimed. The Complainan­t is a manufactur­er / supplier.

Tax deducted under Section 153 on supplies constitute­s final discharge of tax liability. Besides paying the final tax liability, the Complainan­t has also been subjected to tax withholdin­g in utility bills, cash withdrawal­s from bank and at the time of motor vehicle registrati­on. He assails the same to be contrary to law as it amounts to double taxation of his income.

When confronted, the Deptt filed a reply in which a preliminar­y objection was raised that the charge of tax under Sections 235, 231A, 236 and 234 of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 in cases where final tax on the supply of manufactur­ed goods was paid was an appealable issue and should be left to the regular appellate fora for resolution. On merits, the Deptt contended that the tax as levied was consistent with statutory stipulatio­n and there was no double taxation of income. Both sides have been heard and record examined by the FTO.

The Complainan­t has contended in the complaint that the Department­al treatment is contrary to law, placing reliance on the Lahore High Court's order cited as 2011PTD1. As the issue involved is of maladminis­tration, the Department­al contention is found to be misconceiv­ed. The FTO exercised concurrent jurisdicti­on in such matters, as held by the Lahore High Court in order dated 13.09.2012 in Writ Petition No.11545 of 2012. On merits, the Lahore High Court's judgment cited as 2011PTD1 holds the field, unless overturned by the apex court.

According to the Findings of the FTO, as held in judgment cited as 2011PTD1, once income is subjected to taxation in the final tax regime, no additional tax is chargeable. Resort to additional taxation in contravent­ion of the High Court's order is tantamount to maladminis­tration. The FTO Recommende­d the FBR to direct the Commission­er to invoke revisionar­y jurisdicti­on under Section 122A of the Ordinance to revisit the tax charged under Sections 235, 231A, 234 and 236 of the Ordinance, as per law; and report compliance within 30 days.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Pakistan