FBR yet to file comments in response to plea challenging peer-ranking reward scheme

ISLAMABAD: The Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) has failed to file written comments before the Lahore High Court (LHC) in a constitutional petition that directly challenges the legality of its peer-ranking reward scheme.

The petition, filed by Advocate Waheed Shahzad Butt through noted constitutional lawyer Muhammad Azhar Siddique, invokes Article 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan and challenges the legal validity of the Inland Revenue (IR) Reward Rules and the Customs Reward Rules. The petitioner contends that these rules have served as instruments for an “unbridled and unconstitutional distribution of millions from the public exchequer” in the form of rewards to selected FBR officers; disbursements that, the petition argues, lack any credible statutory basis, transparent criteria, or parliamentary oversight.

The LHC had issued notices to a sweeping array of respondents, including the PS to the PM, the Chairman FBR, Members of the FBR Policy Board, Federal Ministers, heads of Parliamentary Finance Committees, the Auditor General Pakistan, and the DG FIA. All respondents were directed to submit formal written replies addressing the serious constitutional and legal allegations contained in the petition.

The FBR’s continued silence is not merely a procedural lapse, it is a statement, said Waheed Butt, adding the revenue authority, which exists to enforce fiscal law and accountability across the country, has apparently found itself unwilling or unable to provide the Court with even a rudimentary justification for how and why precious taxpayer money was distributed through its internal reward mechanism.

At the heart of the petition is the FBR’s peer ranking reward scheme, under which monetary rewards are reportedly distributed among tax officials based on a ranking mechanism determined by their own peers, a closed-loop system that, Waheed Butt argues, is inherently susceptible to favouritism and institutional capture.

The petitioner contends that such disbursements, drawn directly from the public exchequer, lack the statutory backing, transparent selection criteria, and lawful authority required under the Constitution and applicable fiscal statutes. Further, the petition argues that the scheme has been operating entirely outside the framework of approved parliamentary appropriations and structured accountability mechanisms, effectively placing significant sums of public money beyond the reach of legislative scrutiny or audit.

The outcome of this petition is being closely monitored by legal practitioners, civil society organisations, and fiscal accountability watchdogs across Pakistan. The formal implication of the Auditor General and the DG-FIA as respondents underscores the multi-institutional dimension of the accountability questions at stake.

Should the Court find the reward scheme constitutionally infirm, the consequences for how the FBR structures its internal incentive mechanisms and disburses public funds more broadly, would be far-reaching, said Waheed Butt, adding for now, the FBR’s silence before the LHC speaks louder than any written submission.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2026