SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD VS Nemo, 2004 PTD-FEDERAL-TAX-OMBUDSMAN-PAKISTAN 630 (2003)

Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)---

-- First Sched., Part I---Establishment of Office of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXXV of 2000), S. 2(3)---Rebate---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 1^st 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.

Nemo for the Complainant.

Raza Munawwar, I.A.C., Jhelum and Nasir Maqbool Hashmi, Taxation Officer, Islamabad for Respondent.

FINDGINS/DECISION

Brief facts of the case as stated by the complainant are that he is an old man and runs a small hotel which did not fetch him taxable income. He has been assessed to tax for the assessment years 1994-95 to 1999-2000. The assessment is stated to have been made without any enquiry or evidence and is contested to be unjustified, illegal, unwarranted and against the facts of the case. The complainant prays for exemption from tax.

2. In reply the respondent has stated that assessments in complainant's case for the years 1994-95 to 1998-99 were finalized at net income of Rs.30,000, Rs.35,000, Rs.40,000; Rs.50,000 and Rs.60,000 respectively on the basis of Circle Inspector's report. It is submitted the complainant's appeals were rejected by the CIT(A) with the remarks "that the Assessing Officer has not made harsh assessment at all and the AR could not make out a case regarding alleged excessiveness of the assessed income. There is no merit in the appeal". It is further submitted that tax has been levied only, for two years i.e. 1997-98 and 1998-99 at Rs.1000 and Rs.1100 respectively which was quite justified and upheld by the CTI(A). The reply is silent about the assessment for the year 1999-2000.

3. No one appeared on behalf of the complainant. The respondent's representative attended and reiterated the position as contained in the reply. The contentions of the both sides were considered and relevant record was examined. The income assessed for the years 1994-95 to 1998-99 is not considered harsh. It was, however, noticed that the complainant had taken a ground in appeal that he was above 65 years of age and was thus entitled for a statutory rebate @ 50% of tax which was not allowed to him by the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) ignored this ground as the appellate order is silent about it which amounts to maladministration. The complainant is legally entitled to a 50% rebate as provided in Part-I of the 1st Schedule to the repealed Income Tax Ordinance, 1979. It is therefore recommended that the assessment order pertaining to the assessment years 1997-98,1998-99 and 1999-2000 be amended by the Competent Authority and allow tax rebate after ascertaining the age of the complainant. Compliance be reported within 30 days.

C.M.A./1024/FTO/ Order accordingly.