It is learnt that in a landmark order, FTO ruled that the department's failure to implement the stay order of CIR (Appeals) in time is tantamount to maladministration under section 2(3)(i)(b) of the FTO Ordinance hence he ordered the FBR to direct the Chief Commissioner IR to take suitable action against the official responsible for failure to comply with the CIR (Appeals) stay order in the manner that is required by law.
When contacted, representative of the complainant Waheed Shahzad Butt Advocate told the Business Recorder that instant complaint has been preferred against maladministration and undue harassment to the taxpayer and final outcome proves beyond any shadow of doubt that some tax employees of RTO Islamabad were involved in maladministration of justice.
FTO Order states "This is a complaint filed under section 10(1) of the Establishment of the FTO Ordinance, 2000, against non-implementation of stay order issued by CIR (Appeals). The complainant, an individual, contends that the department attached his bank account, after finalisation of income tax assessment under section 121(1) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, for the tax year 2012. The complainant denies ever receiving the assessment order wherefrom the tax demand arose and says that he became aware of the tax demand on receipt of intimation of the attachment from his Bank. After obtaining copies of the relevant documents from the department, he filed appeal before the CIR (Appeals) against the assessment. He also sought grant of stay order by CIR (Appeals) against any attempt by the defendant to recover the said tax demand. Although the stay order dated 11.11.2016 issued by CIR (Appeals) was presented to the competent departmental authority, his Bank account attached earlier was not detached. Complainant contends that the departmental failure to detach his bank account immediately on receipt of the stay order is tantamount to maladministration as defined in section 2(3) (i) (b) of the FTO Ordinance. Subsequently, CIR (Appeals) also disposed of the complainant's appeal against the assessment order passed exparte under section 122(1) of the Ordinance and vacated the assessment. The Complainant thereafter sought this office intervention against the department's administrative excess resulting from its failure to detach his bank account immediately on presentation of stay order of CIR (Appeals).
When confronted under section 10 (4) of the FTO Ordinance the department filed a reply in which it stated that the complainant's bank account had been detached on 10.01.2017 and resultantly his grievance stood redressed. The department denies any administrative excess on its part and stated that its actions are in accordance with law.
The Complainant has filed a rejoinder on the departmental reply and has taken issue with the department contention that its actions were consistent with the relevant law/rules. In this context, he referred to a judgement of the Lahore High Court wherein it has been held "When a clear cut direction was issued by the Appellate Tribunal requiring the Dept to detach the bank accounts of the Petitioner, the Respondent was obligated to comply with the order of the Appellate Tribunal immediately. The Respondent again did not comply with the order of the Appellate Tribunal and admittedly waited to issue a letter to the banks of the Petitioner to detach/de-freeze the bank accounts of the Petitioner. To the mind of the Court, this delay was not inadvertent or bona fide."
The complainant contends that departmental failure to detach his bank account in time was a serious lapse on the part of the respondent that has affected his reputation adversely and has also caused him much mental distress. He is aggrieved by the fact that although specific order passed by CIR (Appeals) was duly presented before the assessing officer, he took no notice of the same and persisted in keeping his bank account attached; and only after he had filed complaint, the department went into action and detached his back account. The complainant contends that the department's lapse was a serious matter and in a similar case, the Lahore High Court had already taken strict cognizance of the lapse. He said the department should have detached his bank account immediately on receipt of CIR (Appeals) stay order dated 11.11.2016 as but the detachment was ordered on 10.01.2017, 02 months after issuance of CIR (Appeals) stay order. Hence, their lapse is thus established. The FTO ordered FBR for swift compliance by all its field formations and action against their failure as mentioned earlier.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2017