AGL 38.75 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (0.13%)
AIRLINK 137.10 Decreased By ▼ -0.78 (-0.57%)
BOP 5.37 Decreased By ▼ -0.06 (-1.1%)
CNERGY 3.87 Increased By ▲ 0.09 (2.38%)
DCL 8.09 Increased By ▲ 0.35 (4.52%)
DFML 45.74 Increased By ▲ 0.12 (0.26%)
DGKC 83.30 Increased By ▲ 2.80 (3.48%)
FCCL 30.27 Increased By ▲ 0.72 (2.44%)
FFBL 57.60 Increased By ▲ 1.80 (3.23%)
FFL 9.14 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (0.55%)
HUBC 106.85 Increased By ▲ 1.25 (1.18%)
HUMNL 14.30 Increased By ▲ 0.25 (1.78%)
KEL 4.68 Increased By ▲ 0.38 (8.84%)
KOSM 7.98 Decreased By ▼ -0.25 (-3.04%)
MLCF 38.93 Increased By ▲ 0.95 (2.5%)
NBP 67.60 Decreased By ▼ -1.63 (-2.35%)
OGDC 168.99 Increased By ▲ 1.99 (1.19%)
PAEL 25.38 Increased By ▲ 0.18 (0.71%)
PIBTL 5.94 Decreased By ▼ -0.84 (-12.39%)
PPL 131.00 Increased By ▲ 0.65 (0.5%)
PRL 23.76 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
PTC 15.75 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (0.32%)
SEARL 64.75 Increased By ▲ 3.27 (5.32%)
TELE 7.40 Increased By ▲ 0.36 (5.11%)
TOMCL 36.09 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.03%)
TPLP 7.86 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (0.64%)
TREET 14.93 Decreased By ▼ -0.22 (-1.45%)
TRG 45.25 Increased By ▲ 0.36 (0.8%)
UNITY 25.83 Increased By ▲ 0.32 (1.25%)
WTL 1.29 Increased By ▲ 0.02 (1.57%)
BR100 9,347 Increased By 123.7 (1.34%)
BR30 28,113 Increased By 346.6 (1.25%)
KSE100 87,195 Increased By 728 (0.84%)
KSE30 27,397 Increased By 234 (0.86%)

ISLAMABAD: The Federal Tax Ombudsman (FTO) has taken notice of the harsh treatment of the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) to an old lady (senior citizen) by issuing multiple notices and ex-parte orders against her for the past many years.

An old lady and a compliant taxpayer before Tax Ombudsman was burdened with multiple notices for audit for the Tax Year 2016. She was engaged in textile manufacturing business, final showcause notice for compliance was issued.

However, the complainant applied for an extension which was rejected and an ex-parte order was passed creating demand of Rs2.7 million.

However, all the relevant details of purchases and expenses were not only filed but also duly examined by the officer but the ex-parte order was passed without considering the details available on record.

The complainant being aggrieved, took up the matter with the FTO.

In response, the chief commissioner–IR contended that the case of the complainant was selected under Section 214C of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001. Subsequently, the ACIR issued notice to produce records for the purpose of audit but the taxpayer did not fulfill its statutory duty. However, in order to provide another opportunity to the taxpayer, show cause notice was issued. As the taxpayer failed to make any compliance, the order was passed under Section 121(1) on the basis of failure to provide explanation.

According to the findings of the FTO, the issue was not assessment of income and determination of tax liability.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2022

Comments

Comments are closed.