AIRLINK 173.79 Increased By ▲ 3.22 (1.89%)
BOP 11.36 Increased By ▲ 0.18 (1.61%)
CNERGY 8.64 Increased By ▲ 0.23 (2.73%)
CPHL 101.64 Increased By ▲ 1.91 (1.92%)
FCCL 46.94 Increased By ▲ 0.34 (0.73%)
FFL 15.39 Increased By ▲ 0.24 (1.58%)
FLYNG 27.79 Increased By ▲ 0.24 (0.87%)
HUBC 143.75 Increased By ▲ 5.97 (4.33%)
HUMNL 12.99 Increased By ▲ 0.07 (0.54%)
KEL 4.52 Decreased By ▼ -0.02 (-0.44%)
KOSM 5.76 Increased By ▲ 0.40 (7.46%)
MLCF 62.33 Decreased By ▼ -0.07 (-0.11%)
OGDC 212.02 Decreased By ▼ -0.14 (-0.07%)
PACE 5.47 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (0.92%)
PAEL 47.07 Decreased By ▼ -0.11 (-0.23%)
PIAHCLA 18.08 Decreased By ▼ -0.40 (-2.16%)
PIBTL 10.86 Increased By ▲ 0.50 (4.83%)
POWER 12.26 Decreased By ▼ -0.07 (-0.57%)
PPL 171.28 Increased By ▲ 1.68 (0.99%)
PRL 35.88 Increased By ▲ 0.03 (0.08%)
PTC 23.36 Increased By ▲ 0.27 (1.17%)
SEARL 96.96 Increased By ▲ 0.70 (0.73%)
SSGC 41.71 Increased By ▲ 2.19 (5.54%)
SYM 14.15 Increased By ▲ 0.31 (2.24%)
TELE 7.10 Decreased By ▼ -0.05 (-0.7%)
TPLP 9.96 Decreased By ▼ -0.07 (-0.7%)
TRG 63.89 Increased By ▲ 0.41 (0.65%)
WAVESAPP 10.02 Increased By ▲ 0.03 (0.3%)
WTL 1.33 Increased By ▲ 0.02 (1.53%)
YOUW 3.72 Increased By ▲ 0.06 (1.64%)
BR100 12,447 Increased By 142.3 (1.16%)
BR30 37,919 Increased By 504.1 (1.35%)
KSE100 116,390 Increased By 1536.7 (1.34%)
KSE30 35,696 Increased By 479.1 (1.36%)

LAHORE: The tax department has failed to object to adjustment of unverified refund towards current year’s liability. An assessment officer of Corporate Tax Office (CTO) had objected to the adjustment of previous year refund towards the current year’s tax liability.

The assessment officer had observed that the taxpayer, a poultry feed manufacturer, had wrongfully adjusted unverified refund of previous year towards the current year’s tax liability. This was termed as mistake warranting rectification under the law.

Accordingly, he issued notice to the taxpayer for explanation. However, the taxpayer couldn’t furnish reply to the notice, followed by passing of the controversial order by the assessment officer.

In his appeal before the Commission, the taxpayer contended that the adjustment was as per rules as well as established practice. He said the officer of Inland Revenue had failed to establish the existence of mistake apparent from record in the self-assessment order.

He further explained that adjustment of refund was as per format of the return of total income prescribed under the Income Tax Rules, 2002 and disallowance of adjustment without proving its admissibility in relevant tax year was illegal.

According to the taxpayer, there was a column under the head of computation with description ‘refund adjustment of other year(s) against demand of this year’. He had made the adjustment in question under this column, as there was no requirement of additional documentation for making the adjustment. He maintained that unless refund claimed by a taxpayer is found inadmissible after due verification under the law, the same cannot be disallowed merely on basis that it was unverified.

He said the department has neither disputed tax overpaid for preceding year nor was there any verification process employed by the department to declare it is inadmissible.

He further said that the observation of the department that refund is only due when the Commissioner is satisfied that tax has been overpaid and an adjustment is due as per law is misconceived because such provision of law becomes relevant where issuance or adjustment of refund is made by the department, and not by the taxpayer.

However, the Commissioner Appeals rejected the appeal, but his order could not sustain at the higher appellate forums.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2024

Comments

Comments are closed.