2002 PLP 2316 (PTD)

The complainant is an existing Wealth Tax Assessee of Circle.29, Zone B, Lahore on NTN 6‑29‑7889. She has alleged that refund of Rs.24,250 was created for the assessment year 1997‑98 on 13‑12‑1997 but despite her repeated request in writing, refund voucher has not been issued by the Department. She has further stated that applications were also addressed to the senior officers of the Zone i.e. the Commissioner of Income Tax, Zone‑B and the Additional Commissioner of Income‑tax, Range‑I, but no response was made by the aforesaid officers.

2. It is vehemently alleged that the concerned Assessing Officer has committed serious 'maladministration' by unlawfully withholding the refund for a very long time. The complainant has, therefore, requested for payment of compensation for the irreparable loss suffered by her due to non‑payment of the refund.

3. The case was fixed for hearing on 22‑2‑2002 but both the representatives of the complainant as well as the Department appeared today on.21‑2‑2002 and requested for hearing of the case as it is declared holiday on 22‑2‑2002. The case has been discussed with the above‑cited representative. The A.R. of the complainant has also filed a rejoinder on the parawise comments furnished by the Department.

4. The respondent in the parawise comments vide Letter No.3897, dated 23‑1‑2002 has reported that the refund of the complainant was never withheld. However, due to long leave of the concerned IAC the claim could not be processed earlier. It is further reported that the refund has been issued on 19‑1‑2002 vide Refund Voucher No. 11185/004.

5. The A.R. of the complainant has conceded that the refund has been issued to the complainant but insisted on payment of compensation. He has contended that withholding of the refund without any lawful justification is certainly covered by the definition of 'maladministration'. In his rejoinder filed on 21‑1‑2002 he has insisted for payment of compensation under section 102 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979.

6. The request of the complainant for payment of compensation A under section 102 of the Income Tax Ordinance @ 15 % is misconceived. The refund has been created in this case on the completion of Wealth Tax Assessment for the year 1997‑

98. The copy of the Assessment Order furnished by the complainant shows that refund was created on 13‑12‑1997 which has been paid after a long delay on 19‑1‑2002 as reported by the respondent in the parawise comments, dated 23‑1‑2002. The respondent has also stated that the refund due was not withheld and the delay was due to long leave of the concerned I. A. C. It is not possible to believe that the office of the I.A.C. remained vacant from December, A 1997 to December, 2001. There was absolutely no justification for withholding the refund for such a long period. The complainant is, therefore, entitled for compensation as provided by section 31‑C of the Wealth Tax Act, 1963.

7. In view of the above facts, it is recommended: (i)???????? Additional payment for delayed refund be worked out and paid to the complainant as provided in section 31‑C of the Wealth Tax Act, 1963 within 30 days of the receipt of this order. (ii)??????? The compliance be reported within a week thereafter. C.M.A./M.A.K./324/FTO ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Order accordingly.