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 Income Tax department has proved that the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), a state-owned enterprise (SOE), would have to opt for the Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) to establish its claim that it was exempt from paying income tax and didn’t have to follow the ARD process.

It may be noted that the SOEs are claiming exemption from paying income tax despite an amendment to section 134A of the Income Tax, requiring SOEs to mandatorily go for ARD to prove their exemptions.

The ADR process is available to resolve tax disputes between state-owned enterprises and the Federal Board of Revenue.

Initially, said sources, when this scheme was launched it had its teething problems for a number of reasons, including, but not limited to, the authority of FBR in terms of Section 134A(2) of the Ordinance not to accept the decision of an ADR committee if it was in favour of the taxpayer; a right of further appeal if the, taxpayer was not satisfied with the order of FBR; and composition of ADRC Committees which were headed by the officers of the FBR.

Finally, on 06.05.2024 Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 2024, was promulgated, whereby the newly amended Section 134-A of the Ordinance is to apply mutatis mutandis on the Sales Tax Act,1990 and the Federal Excise Act, 2005; the limit of Rs.100 million has been reduced to Rs 50 million.

The sources said the most significant and relevant amendment made, which is fully applicable to the CAA, is that now it is mandatory for SOE to go for ADR, whereas the limit of Rs 50 million is also not applicable.

Earlier, the management of an SOE was reluctant to go for mediation in any business transaction due to fear of prosecution, but through the newly amended provisions, they have been protected from any suit, prosecution or other legal proceedings.

Since referral to ADR is now mandatory for SOE, a right to appeal has also been provided to SOE when the matter is not decided by ADRC within the stipulated period.

Accordingly, the relevant appellate forum has directed the CAA to use the ADR process or follow the Rules of Business to resolve the dispute.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2025

Comments

Comments are closed.