AIRLINK 177.00 Increased By ▲ 2.40 (1.37%)
BOP 12.81 Increased By ▲ 0.29 (2.32%)
CNERGY 7.49 Increased By ▲ 0.16 (2.18%)
FCCL 42.02 Increased By ▲ 2.09 (5.23%)
FFL 14.84 Increased By ▲ 0.16 (1.09%)
FLYNG 27.70 Decreased By ▼ -0.13 (-0.47%)
HUBC 134.51 Increased By ▲ 0.88 (0.66%)
HUMNL 12.96 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.08%)
KEL 4.44 Increased By ▲ 0.07 (1.6%)
KOSM 6.06 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (0.83%)
MLCF 54.51 Increased By ▲ 1.32 (2.48%)
OGDC 222.58 Increased By ▲ 9.67 (4.54%)
PACE 6.03 Increased By ▲ 0.03 (0.5%)
PAEL 41.30 Increased By ▲ 0.20 (0.49%)
PIAHCLA 15.62 Increased By ▲ 0.11 (0.71%)
PIBTL 10.06 Increased By ▲ 0.48 (5.01%)
POWER 11.17 Increased By ▲ 0.23 (2.1%)
PPL 183.99 Increased By ▲ 12.88 (7.53%)
PRL 34.31 Increased By ▲ 0.98 (2.94%)
PTC 23.34 Increased By ▲ 0.32 (1.39%)
SEARL 91.07 Decreased By ▼ -0.30 (-0.33%)
SILK 1.11 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
SSGC 33.98 Increased By ▲ 1.47 (4.52%)
SYM 15.96 Decreased By ▼ -0.04 (-0.25%)
TELE 7.86 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.13%)
TPLP 11.01 Increased By ▲ 0.02 (0.18%)
TRG 58.72 Increased By ▲ 0.42 (0.72%)
WAVESAPP 10.79 Decreased By ▼ -0.30 (-2.71%)
WTL 1.36 Increased By ▲ 0.02 (1.49%)
YOUW 3.81 Increased By ▲ 0.02 (0.53%)
BR100 12,023 Increased By 222.2 (1.88%)
BR30 36,605 Increased By 1166.7 (3.29%)
KSE100 113,713 Increased By 1459.4 (1.3%)
KSE30 35,302 Increased By 517.9 (1.49%)

LAHORE: Taxpayers from sugar industry have challenged the power of Commissioner Inland Revenue (CIR) to make a random selection of sales tax returns for audit, terming it arbitrary as well as a roving and fishing inquiry into their tax affairs.

According to sources, the CIR had issued notices under Sales Tax Act Excise Act allegedly on the scrutiny of the returns filed under the self-assessment regime. In some cases, the department had not even conducted scrutiny of the returns and selected cases for the audit purposes.

The taxpayers were of the view that the Commissioner cannot issue notice without assigning reasons. They further contended that the notices were not only based on mala fide and arbitrary approach but also issued mechanically on or about the same time to all of them.

They further maintained that the CIR does not have power to make a random selection for audit and any such power vests only with the FBR. In some cases, they added, the CIR had selected returns for audit for a second time within a period of three years, which is prohibited by the law. In addition, the department had also proceeded to select returns for audit for consecutive tax years in one go, which is again not the spirit of the law.

The department, on the other hand, maintained that audit was the most effective tool to assess the veracity of the tax return filed under the self-assessment regime and the taxpayers are provided with remedies once adverse order is passed against them.

The department also dispelled the impression that notices were issued arbitrarily, saying that they were issued after examining the tax returns filed by the millers. Since sales tax, unlike income tax, is not out of the pocket of the sugar mills, therefore, no reason was requited to be assigned to the taxpayers for access to record or documents.

However, the relevant appellate forum maintained that the notices were of no legal effect because they were issued by the CIR while failing to disclose reasons for selecting the returns for audit.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2024

Comments

Comments are closed.