Disposal of complaints

Contention of complainant, inter alia, was that Department had failed to pass orders for refund under S.170(4) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 within 60 days of filing of return, therefore maladministration stood established

Validity

Admitted position that before filing of present compliant, Department had already disposed of complainant's application for refund under S.170(4) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, therefore, grievance of complainant had been redressed already

Complaint being bereft of any merit, was dismissed, accordingly.

Complaint against failure of Department in giving effect to order of Appellate Tribunal whereby complainant / taxpayer was held entitled to tax refund

Validity

Department stated that after order of Appellate Tribunal, complainant had not yet filed e-application for refund, and assured that after filing of such application, Department would issue refund as per law within 30 days

Federal Tax Ombudsman observed that upon such assurance of Department, complaint could be disposed of, and recommended that Department issue refund as per law and report compliance of same to Federal Tax Ombudsman

Complaint was disposed of, accordingly.

Complaint against failure to provide taxpayer opportunity of hearing and unilateral reduction of refund amount with no compensation for delayed refund

Contention of Department was that said complaint was that not maintainable under S.9(2)(b) of Establishment of Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance, 2000

Validity

Objection against maintainability of complaint was not valid as complainant was aggrieved at passing of order without providing opportunity of hearing, which was a clear violation of S.170(4) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

Federal Tax Ombudsman observed that failure to provide complainant / taxpayer opportunity of hearing before passing of order under S.170(4) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 was tantamount to maladministration, and recommended Department to direct concerned commissioner to pass fresh order after providing opportunity of hearing to complainant

Complaint was disposed of, accordingly.

Complainant sought findings against Department for inordinate delay in issuance of refund on account of excessive deduction of tax

Validity

Federal Tax Ombudsman, upon assurance of Department to dispose of refund application within a period of 30 days, disposed of the complaint without adjudicating on legal and factual merits of complaint.

Complainant sought findings against Department for inordinate delay in issuance of refund on account of excessive deduction of tax

Validity

Federal Tax Ombudsman, upon assurance of Department to dispose of refund application within a period of 30 days, disposed of the complaint without adjudicating on legal and factual merits of complaint.

Complainant sought findings against Department for inordinate delay in issuance of refund on account of excessive deduction of tax

Validity

Federal Tax Ombudsman, upon assurance of Department to dispose of refund application within a period of 30 days, disposed of the complaint without adjudicating on legal and factual merits of complaint.

Contention of complainant was that order on its application for issuance of refund was not processed within the 60 days period provided for in S.170(4) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

Department contended that jurisdiction of the Federal Tax Ombudsman was barred under S.9(2)(b) of the Establishment of Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance, 2000

Validity

Refund claim was not an issue pertaining to assessment of income or determination of tax liability and Commissioner had to determine excess refundable amount after verification of tax payment and in case there was any deficiency, then the Commissioner was required to requisition the same by issuing a letter under S.120(3) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 and no such exercise was conducted in the present case

Failure to deal with a statutory obligation within the time prescribed under a statute amounted to "maladministration"

Federal Tax Ombudsman recommended to the Department to direct to the Commissioner to settle the complainant's refund claim in accordance with the provisions of law without further delay

Complaint was disposed of, accordingly.

Complaint against initiation of proceedings under Ss.161 & 205 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 for default in deduction of withholding tax at source

Contention of complainant was that proceedings initiated in respect of the default in deduction of withholding tax already stood annulled by the Commissioner (Appeals) and there was no justification for initiation of said proceedings again

Validity

Federal Tax Ombudsman observed that the matter had gone though two rounds of appeal and was also subject of a complaint made to the Federal Tax Ombudsman, and thereafter fresh proceedings were initiated against complainant

Federal Tax Ombudsman disposed of the complaint on assurance of the Department to consider the complainant's reply to the notice on merits and with the direction to resolve the matter early as per law on receipt of reply and documents from the complainant.