| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2016 SLG 91 2016 SLD 91 (2016) 113 TAX 46 |
Federal Tax Ombudsman
Complaint No. l02/ISD/ST(23)/1411/2014, decided on 21-04-2015.
ABDUR RAUF CHAUDHARY.
Abrar Ahmad Khan, Advisor, for the Dealing Officer. Ijaz Akber, FCA, for the Authorized Representative. Naveed Hassan, DCIR, for the Departmental Representative.
Complaint No. l02/ISD/ST(23)/1411/2014, decided on 21-04-2015.
ABDUR RAUF CHAUDHARY.
Abrar Ahmad Khan, Advisor, for the Dealing Officer. Ijaz Akber, FCA, for the Authorized Representative. Naveed Hassan, DCIR, for the Departmental Representative.
KHAWAR NAWAZ, MANAGING DIRECTOR M/S T.F. PIPES LIMITED
VS
THE SECRETARY REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD
Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990
Section: 74
Law: Sales Tax Rules, 2006
Section: 9
Sales Tax Act, 1990 (VII of 1990) Section: 74 - Sales Tax Refund Rules, 2006, Rule - 9 - Condonation of time limit for filing Sales Tax Refund claim - Rejection of application by FBR - Extension of time limit for filing refund claim rejected by Secretary IR - Shifting of delay to complainant instead of department for non-processing of refund claim Maladministration - Complaint against Department Complainant contended that RCPS backup was prepared in previously run RCPS software and since time of 20 days lapsed and claim was not furnished on prescribed software, that Complainant was advised to get condonation u/s 74 of Sales Tax Act, 1990 to enable RTO to process claim - Board requisitioned report from RTO but in vain - Synopsis - (l) Whether hearing it became apparent that refund claim by Complainant was well within time on prescribed format then in vogue as stamp of tax Facilitation division on Complainant's letter, confirmed receipt of refund claim documents in RTO - Held yes. (2) Whether it was also evident that effort of Department to process it in December, 2012 failed due to introduction of new procedure of filing data electronically - Held yes. (3) Whether claim was not processed by Deptt. until December, 2012 when new format had become operational since 13-08-2010 through SRO. 810(1)72010, 13-08- 2010 - Held yes. (4) Whether since new system allowed processing of refund claims within 120 days, complainant was advised to get condonation from FBR - Held yes. (5) Whether Complainant's request for condonation was regretted by FBR - Held yes. (6) Whether processing of refund claim of Complainant was delayed due to slackness on part of Deptt, to process it within time despite claim being filed within time and on prescribed format in vogue at time of filing claim - Held Yes. FINDINGS/RECOMMENDATIONS The complaint has been filed under Section 9 of the FTO Ordinance, 2000 against rejection of request of the Complainant by FBR for condonation in time limit for filing of sales tax refund claim for tax period March, 2010. Briefly the case is that the Complainant had (lied its monthly Sales Tax Return for March 2010 on April 13, 2010, declaring sales tax refund…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492