AIRLINK 74.00 Decreased By ▼ -0.25 (-0.34%)
BOP 5.14 Increased By ▲ 0.09 (1.78%)
CNERGY 4.55 Increased By ▲ 0.13 (2.94%)
DFML 37.15 Increased By ▲ 1.31 (3.66%)
DGKC 89.90 Increased By ▲ 1.90 (2.16%)
FCCL 22.40 Increased By ▲ 0.20 (0.9%)
FFBL 33.03 Increased By ▲ 0.31 (0.95%)
FFL 9.75 Decreased By ▼ -0.04 (-0.41%)
GGL 10.75 Decreased By ▼ -0.05 (-0.46%)
HBL 115.50 Decreased By ▼ -0.40 (-0.35%)
HUBC 137.10 Increased By ▲ 1.26 (0.93%)
HUMNL 9.95 Increased By ▲ 0.11 (1.12%)
KEL 4.60 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.22%)
KOSM 4.83 Increased By ▲ 0.17 (3.65%)
MLCF 39.75 Decreased By ▼ -0.13 (-0.33%)
OGDC 138.20 Increased By ▲ 0.30 (0.22%)
PAEL 27.00 Increased By ▲ 0.57 (2.16%)
PIAA 24.24 Decreased By ▼ -2.04 (-7.76%)
PIBTL 6.74 Decreased By ▼ -0.02 (-0.3%)
PPL 123.62 Increased By ▲ 0.72 (0.59%)
PRL 27.40 Increased By ▲ 0.71 (2.66%)
PTC 13.90 Decreased By ▼ -0.10 (-0.71%)
SEARL 61.75 Increased By ▲ 3.05 (5.2%)
SNGP 70.15 Decreased By ▼ -0.25 (-0.36%)
SSGC 10.52 Increased By ▲ 0.16 (1.54%)
TELE 8.57 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.12%)
TPLP 11.10 Decreased By ▼ -0.28 (-2.46%)
TRG 64.02 Decreased By ▼ -0.21 (-0.33%)
UNITY 26.76 Increased By ▲ 0.71 (2.73%)
WTL 1.38 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
BR100 7,874 Increased By 36.2 (0.46%)
BR30 25,599 Increased By 139.8 (0.55%)
KSE100 75,342 Increased By 411.7 (0.55%)
KSE30 24,214 Increased By 68.6 (0.28%)

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.