Concealing of proceedings

2014 PTD 1950 FEDERAL-TAX-OMBUDSMAN-PAKISTAN Judicial Precedent

Ss.122 (5A), 153, 214 & 221Federal Ombudsman Institutional Reforms Act (I of 2013), Ss.18 & 24Establishment of Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXXV of 2000), Ss. 2(3), 10(4) & 29Review of orderEarlier recommendationCorroborates service receiptsConcealing of proceedings

Assessee approached Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals) of relief in orders passed under S.122 (5A) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

When Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals) became aware of earlier recommendations of Federal Tax Ombudsman, he rectified his order

Assessee filed review application before Federal Tax Ombudsman and made no mention of the fact that Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals) had rectified his findings/decision recorded earlier and by concealing such fact assessee obtained favourable decision

Validity

Assessee had deliberately concealed his knowledge regarding Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals) recourse to provisions of S.221 of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, when he filed review application earlier before Federal Tax Ombudsman

Such review application was not bona fide and therefore, not competent, as assessee did not approach Federal Tax Ombudsman with clean hands

Assessee tried to abuse process of law through concealment before Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals), Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue and Federal Tax Ombudsman

Assessee sought to obtain relief by concealing facts and misrepresenting his case

If assessee had apprised Federal Tax Ombudsman that Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals) started proceedings to rectify/reverse his findings recorded in his earlier order and had then gone to actually rectify his earlier order, Federal Tax Ombudsman would have straight-away rejected review application in limine

Federal Tax Ombudsman directed the authorities to proceed strictly in accordance with law as per statutory stipulation and applicable case-law including findings/recommendations of Federal Tax Ombudsman on the issue of Minimum Taxation on corporate service receipts that might be applicable in the years concerned and would issue refund due on adjustable deductions in such years, if any, found to be properly due to assessee

Review application was rejected accordingly.