AIRLINK 75.50 Increased By ▲ 0.65 (0.87%)
BOP 5.04 Increased By ▲ 0.06 (1.2%)
CNERGY 4.54 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (1.11%)
DFML 42.00 Increased By ▲ 2.00 (5%)
DGKC 87.50 Increased By ▲ 1.15 (1.33%)
FCCL 21.55 Increased By ▲ 0.19 (0.89%)
FFBL 33.80 Decreased By ▼ -0.05 (-0.15%)
FFL 9.80 Increased By ▲ 0.08 (0.82%)
GGL 10.50 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (0.48%)
HBL 113.05 Increased By ▲ 0.31 (0.27%)
HUBC 138.10 Increased By ▲ 0.66 (0.48%)
HUMNL 11.42 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
KEL 5.27 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.19%)
KOSM 4.66 Increased By ▲ 0.03 (0.65%)
MLCF 38.05 Increased By ▲ 0.25 (0.66%)
OGDC 140.40 Increased By ▲ 0.90 (0.65%)
PAEL 25.85 Increased By ▲ 0.24 (0.94%)
PIAA 21.50 Increased By ▲ 0.82 (3.97%)
PIBTL 6.92 Increased By ▲ 0.12 (1.76%)
PPL 124.45 Increased By ▲ 2.25 (1.84%)
PRL 26.79 Increased By ▲ 0.21 (0.79%)
PTC 13.94 Decreased By ▼ -0.11 (-0.78%)
SEARL 59.24 Increased By ▲ 0.26 (0.44%)
SNGP 69.01 Increased By ▲ 0.06 (0.09%)
SSGC 10.35 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (0.49%)
TELE 8.45 Increased By ▲ 0.07 (0.84%)
TPLP 11.24 Increased By ▲ 0.18 (1.63%)
TRG 64.36 Increased By ▲ 0.17 (0.26%)
UNITY 26.57 Increased By ▲ 0.02 (0.08%)
WTL 1.50 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (3.45%)
BR100 7,887 Increased By 49.7 (0.63%)
BR30 25,615 Increased By 163.5 (0.64%)
KSE100 75,530 Increased By 415.4 (0.55%)
KSE30 24,272 Increased By 158.5 (0.66%)

LAHORE: A capricious tax officer has proceeded to rectify the very order-in-original despite the matter having been decided by the appellate forums and pending before the higher forum in continuation of the assessment order, said sources.

The commissioner appeals, instead of dealing with the concerned tax officer strictly, preferred to examine the merits once again annulled the order with certain directions to the officer thus indirectly contributing in the error that had been committed by the assessing officer, said the sources.

They added that the commissioner appeals had completely over sighted the fact that the officer Inland Revenue had no authority to rectify his order at a subsequent stage while the reference application was pending before the court of law.

According to details, the regional tax office initiated proceedings against a private housing society on the basis of information from the Lahore Development Authority regarding the area used for development purposes. However, the taxpayer moved a rectification application before the assessing officer on a new and different ground that the information regarding the area used for development purposes was incorrect while the order in original was pending adjudication.

The taxpayer stressed on rectification of the order in original on the basis of definite and accurate information verifiable from the Authority as well as the evidence presented by him. The assessing officer rectified his previous order in original and taxpayer filled an appeal against it after showing his dissatisfaction towards the rectification order.

Interestingly, the order passed by the commissioner appeals was challenged again before the tribunal which pointed out that both the authorities had passed the orders in complete oblivion of law. It further maintained that after exercising original jurisdiction, the officer Inland Revenue became functions officio and enjoys no authority to rectify his own order.

According to the appellate forums, the Officer Inland Revenue had nullified all the proceedings/orders by changing the order in original and passing directions by Commissioner amounted to justifying rectification made by the assessing officer.

Record revealed that the competent forum had suspended the order in original subject to deposit of certain amount against charge of federal excise duty and the officer Inland Revenue had even re-calculated the payable excise duty in the rectification order.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2024

Comments

Comments are closed.