MUSHTAQ AHMAD, KHARIAN CANTT. VS SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD, 2003 PTD-FEDERAL-TAX-OMBUDSMAN-PAKISTAN 266 (2002)

Wealth Tax Act (XV of 1963)‑‑‑

‑‑‑‑S. 16‑‑‑Establishment of Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXXV of 2000), S.9‑‑‑Assessee was living abroad‑‑‑Wealth Tax was levied and recovered from the bank account of the assessee in respect of a house which belonged to the son and son‑in‑law of the assessee‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑No proper service of notice was made in the case prior to. the notice by affixture and there was no material on record to show how the property in question was attributed to the complainant‑‑‑Federal Tax Ombudsman recommended that the wealth tax assessments for the years 1995‑96 be cancelled by the Commissioner under S.25 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1963 with the directions that fresh inquiry be made particularly with regard to the ownership of the property in question and if the complainant is not found to be the owner of the property proceedings be filed in his case and the amount of Rs.134,000 recovered from his bank account be refunded to him.

Muhammad Bashir for the Complainant.

Jafar Nawaz, D.C.I.T. for Respondent.

FINDINGS/DECISION

This is a Complaint by a resident of Norway. It is stated that wealth tax assessments for the years 1995‑96 to 1998‑99 have been made in the complainant's case on the basis of valuation of a house in Kharian Cantt. which does not belong to him. I, is further stated that wealth tax demand of Rs.134,000 was created fore the 3 years which has been illegally recovered from the complainant's bank account. It has been prayed that the wealth tax wrongly recovered be ordered to be refunded to the complainant.

2. According to the respondent's reply, proceedings were initiated in the case on the basis of survey and statutory notices were issued calling for wealth tax returns for the assessment years 1995‑96 to 1998 99. There was, however, statedly no compliance and there was allegedly no response either to subsequent notices. It is stated that finally a notice under section 16(4) was issued for compliance on 26‑6‑2001 and was served through affixture but again there was no compliance. It is stated that in the ex parte assessment the value of the house was estimated and the resultant wealth tax demand was validly recovered from the complainant's bank account.

3. In the letter written from Norway by the complainant, which was produced during the hearing, it was reiterated that the property in question did not belong to the complainant but to two other family members. During the hearing it was explained on behalf of the complainant that the house in question has two portions. One portion statedly belongs to the complainant's son, Mr. Mubashar Ali, who is also statedly living in Norway. This portion statedly remains vacant and is used by Mr. Mnbashar Ali or other family members during their visit to Pakistan. The other portion statedly belongs to Mr. Ansar Ali, who is the son‑in‑law of the complainant and statedly lives in the said portion with his family. According to the complainant he has no concern with the property and his address in Norway is as under:‑‑‑

Mushtaq Ahmed

Stovner V N‑22A

0982 OSLO, NORWAY.

4. During the hearing it was found that in fact, no proper service of notices was made in the case prior to the notice by affixture and there was no material on record to show how the property in question was attributed to the complainant. Under the circumstances it is recommended that:‑‑‑

(i) The wealth tax assessments for the years 1995‑96 to 1998‑99 be cancelled by the Commissioner under section 25 of the Wealth Tax Act with the directions that' fresh inquiry be made particularly with regard to the ownership of the property in question.

(ii) If the complainant is not found to be the owner of the property proceedings be filed in his case and the amount of Rs.134,000 recovered from his bank account be refunded to him.

(iii) Compliance be reported within 45 days.

C.M.A./489/FTO Order accordingly.