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: 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.