Rebate

Taxpayer was aggrieved of fixing liability without allowing rebate as admissible under Second Schedule of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

Appellate authority decided matter in favour of taxpayer

Validity

Notification No. S.R.O. 1086(I)/2010 dated 30-11-2011 provided that rebate was allowable @ 80% to fast moving consumer goods

Taxpayer being manufacturer and distributor was capable to earn a better margin of profit as compared to distributor who even did not possess title of goods

Goods were of higher value and carried small amount of profit

Higher value of product lower margin of profit, fast moving goods and disproportionate charge of tax under S. 113 of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 @ 1% was main purpose to allow certain concessions in statute

Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue maintained orders passed by appellate authority as authorities had failed to establish its claim

Appeal was dismissed in circumstances.

Assessee being above 65 years, rebate at 50% of the tax was neither allowed by the Assessing Officer nor such ground taken in appeal was considered by the First Appellate Authority

Validity

Silence of order of First Appellate Authority about the ground of appeal taken by the assessee regarding rebate amounted to maladministration

Complainant/assessee was legally entitled to a 50% rebate as provided in Part I of the 1st Sched. to the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979

Federal Tax Ombudsman recommended that assessment orders pertaining to assessment years, 1997-98, 1998-99 and 1999-2000 be amended by the Competent Authority and allow the tax rebate after ascertaining the age of the complainant/assessee.