AGL 24.24 Increased By ▲ 0.77 (3.28%)
AIRLINK 107.70 Increased By ▲ 1.59 (1.5%)
BOP 5.12 Decreased By ▼ -0.05 (-0.97%)
CNERGY 3.63 Decreased By ▼ -0.03 (-0.82%)
DCL 7.32 Decreased By ▼ -0.48 (-6.15%)
DFML 42.10 Decreased By ▼ -2.09 (-4.73%)
DGKC 88.80 Increased By ▲ 0.30 (0.34%)
FCCL 21.75 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
FFBL 41.85 Decreased By ▼ -0.67 (-1.58%)
FFL 8.61 Decreased By ▼ -0.14 (-1.6%)
HUBC 148.75 Increased By ▲ 0.95 (0.64%)
HUMNL 10.14 Decreased By ▼ -0.11 (-1.07%)
KEL 4.28 Decreased By ▼ -0.06 (-1.38%)
KOSM 3.59 Decreased By ▼ -0.20 (-5.28%)
MLCF 36.20 Decreased By ▼ -0.20 (-0.55%)
NBP 47.75 Decreased By ▼ -1.55 (-3.14%)
OGDC 129.10 Decreased By ▼ -1.75 (-1.34%)
PAEL 25.75 Decreased By ▼ -0.20 (-0.77%)
PIBTL 6.00 Decreased By ▼ -0.05 (-0.83%)
PPL 113.65 Decreased By ▼ -0.90 (-0.79%)
PRL 22.30 Decreased By ▼ -0.30 (-1.33%)
PTC 12.10 Decreased By ▼ -0.27 (-2.18%)
SEARL 54.98 Decreased By ▼ -0.72 (-1.29%)
TELE 7.11 Decreased By ▼ -0.14 (-1.93%)
TOMCL 37.11 Increased By ▲ 0.71 (1.95%)
TPLP 7.76 Decreased By ▼ -0.19 (-2.39%)
TREET 15.00 Decreased By ▼ -0.29 (-1.9%)
TRG 55.54 Decreased By ▼ -1.16 (-2.05%)
UNITY 31.20 Decreased By ▼ -0.65 (-2.04%)
WTL 1.15 Decreased By ▼ -0.02 (-1.71%)
BR100 8,248 Decreased By -46.7 (-0.56%)
BR30 25,878 Decreased By -223.8 (-0.86%)
KSE100 78,030 Decreased By -439.8 (-0.56%)
KSE30 25,084 Decreased By -114.2 (-0.45%)

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.