IFTIKHAR AHMED VS SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD, 2002 PTD-FEDERAL-TAX-OMBUDSMAN-PAKISTAN 2281 (2002)

Income‑tax‑‑‑

‑‑‑Establishment of Office of Federal Tax. Ombudsman Ordinance (XXXV of 2000), S.9‑‑‑Assessment‑‑‑Income was assessed at Rs 300,000 on the basis of Tax Profile prepared by PRAL while the income was declared in survey form at Rs30,000‑‑‑Assessment was cancelled by the Commissioner of Income‑tax for de novo proceedings on the basis of assessment record as well as information provided by the complainant‑‑ ‑Grievance been redressed by, the Commissioner's timely action‑‑‑Such mistakes were occurring in many cases causing embarrassment to the Assessing Officers and harassment to the assessees‑‑‑Federal Tax Ombudsman recommended that Central Board of Revenue should ensure that PRAL was properly manned with knowledgeable staff under the supervision of experts.

Ms. Shazia Abid for the Complainant.

Mian Muhammad Akram for Respondent.

DECISION/FINDINGS

The complainant is an employee in readymade garment shop. It has been alleged that he has been assessed at an income of Rs.300,000 although he is earning Rs.30,000 anually. In compliance with the notice issued by the department, it, was replied that ex parte assessments were finalized at net income of Rs.300,000 each for the assessment, year:. 2000‑2001 and 2001‑2002. It has also been submitted that on the basis of the assessment record as well as information provided by the complainant the Commissioner has cancelled both the assessments for de novo proceedings. A copy of the order has also enclosed. The complainant is present and confirms the receipt of the order

2. The main cause for making the assessment was that in the survey E form he had declared income at Rs.30,000 but in the Tax Profile prepared by PRAL‑mentioned it as Rs.300,000 each year. This was a clear mistake of PRAL. Clearly the mistake for submitting wrong tax profile lies on the agencies handling the job. This may be due to inexperience and negligence on the part of PRAL. During hearing Mian Muhammad Akram informed that there are several other cases in which similar complaints have been noticed. He is required to file such information to this Secretariat. The grievance has been redressed by the A Commissioner's timely action.

3. Such mistakes are occurring in many case causing, embarrassment to the Assessing Officers and harassment to the assessees.

It is recommended that:

(i) CBR ensures that PRAL is properly manned with knowledgeable staff under the supervision of experts.

(ii) Compliance within 30 days.

C.M.A./M.A.K./313/FTOOrder accordingly.