2002 PLP 2804 (PTD)
Messrs KHAIR-UL-SANAT COTTON GINNERS, PRIVATE LIMITED Versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD
| Citation | 2002 PLP 2804 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Federal Tax Ombudsman |
| Bench Members | Justice (Retd.) Saleem Akhtar, Federal Tax Ombudsman |
| Parties | Messrs KHAIR-UL-SANAT COTTON GINNERS, PRIVATE LIMITED Versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD |
| Primary Law | Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PLP 2804 (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2002 PLP 2804 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Federal Tax Ombudsman bench comprising: Justice (Retd.) Saleem Akhtar, Federal Tax Ombudsman.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 2804 (PTD) (Messrs KHAIR-UL-SANAT COTTON GINNERS, PRIVATE LIMITED Versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Habib Ahmad, D-CIT for Respondent.
- Habib Ahmad, D‑CIT for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss.96 & 102
Establishment of Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXXV of 2000), Ss.2(3) & 22
Additional Payment for delayed refund
Complaint was made for non-payment of refund for four. years which amounted to maladministration and compensation @ 15% was also claimed for delay of refund
Validity-- Representative of the Department appeared without the assessment record but; at the same time, readily conceded that refund was due to the complainant; when asked to get confirmation from the concerned Assessing Officer whether the claim of refund had been settled after making necessary verification as per specific instructions of the Regional Commissioner of Income-tax to resolve the issue by 2-5-2002, the Representative of the Department admitted that the matter had not so far been settled
Such glaring indifference to the instructions of superiors coupled With obvious attempt to unnecessarily drag the matter very much amounts to maladministration
Federal Tax Ombudsman recommended that necessary verification be made and the refund due to the complainant be issued within 15 days of the receipt of the order that compensation be awarded as per provisions of S.102 of the Income Tax Ordinance and the officer (person not the office) be reprimanded for sleeping over the direction by the Regional Commissioner of Income-tax and the `counseling" recorded in the ACR. None appeared for the Complainant.
Judgment & Decree
2000 2001 139,039 2001‑2002 33,500 Total:‑ Rs. 230,798 Further the Complainant prays for issuing directions to the respondent for payment of compensation @ 15% along-with the above mentioned refund under section 22 of the Establishment of the Office of Federal 'Tax Ombudsman Ordinance.
2. None was present for the Complainant when called out. The complaint is, therefore, taken up for adjudication on merit with the help of the Respondent's Representative.
3. The Respondent's reply vide Letter No.80‑III/FTO‑BWP‑6393 dated 2‑4‑2000 submits as under:‑‑‑ It is correct that the Complainant company filed an application on 19‑2‑2002 requesting for payment of refund amounting to Rs.230,
798. The assessee has provided photocopies of challans which are not recorded in the Daily Collection Register. The amounts were actually deposited at Lahore, Karachi etc., The concerned officer has already issued letters to the concerned Date Processing Center for verification of Challans. The concerned Officer has been directed to get the claim refund settled after necessary verification within a month (up to 2‑5‑2062).
3. The Representative of the Respondent appeared without the assessment record but, at the same time, readily conceded that refund aggregating Rs.230,798 is due to the Complainant. When asked to get confirmation from the concerned Income Tax Office whether the claim of refund has been settled after making necessary verification as per specific instructions of the R‑CIT, Central Region, Multan, to resolve the issue by 2‑5‑2002; the Representative of the Department admitted that the matter has not so far been settled. This glaring indifference to the instructions of superiors coupled with obvious attempt to unnecessarily drags the matters very much amounts to "maladministra tion". It is, therefore, Recommended that:‑‑ (i) Necessary verification be made and the refund due to the Complainant be issued within 15 days of the receipt of this order. (ii) Compensation be awarded as per the provisions of section 102 of the Income Tax Ordinance. (iii) The officer (person not the office) be reprimanded for sleeping over the direction by the R‑CIT and the "Counseling" recorded in the ACR.
4. Compliance report be submitted within 30 days of the receipt of this order. C.M.A./M.A.K./431/FTO Order accordingly.