Federal Tax Ombudsman (FTO) has directed the tax authorities to stop unlawful recovery from bank accounts of taxpayers.
The FTO issued the order dated September 30, 2022 in a complaint against non-issuance of refund amounting to Rs23.25 million for tax year 2016 along with compensation.
According to the complainant, which is an Association of Person (AOP), filed return for tax year 2016. Later on, a tax office of the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR), amended the assessment order by making an addition of Rs1,754 million and rs164.21 million.
Being aggrieved, the complainant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), Gujranwala who modified the order and annulled the addition of Rs164 million, with the directions that the unit office for further necessary verification and confirmed the addition of Rs1,754 million.
The tax office, recovered an amount of Rs23.25 million through attachment of bank accounts on the very next day without passing appeal effect order. Statedly, recovery was also made from bank accounts of some un-concerned persons.
The complainant filed appeal before appellate tribunal Lahore, who order granted stay order with certain observations.
The FTO in its findings revealed that the recovery of Rs23.25 million had been made from the complainant AOP and certain other unconcerned whereas no demand was in the field at the time of making such recovery. “This act of department tantamount to maladministration.”
It is also found that recovery from the bank accounts of unconcerned person is also an act which tantamount to maladministration.
The FTO in its recommendations to the FBR to ensure that an internal fact finding is conducted to see as who had recovered the amounts from bank account without giving appeal effect and without having legally recoverable tax demand on record.
FBR has been asked to issue clear directions to all field formations: forestalling unlawful recovery in the absence of any legally recoverable tax demand; and recovery from the accounts of unconcerned persons/entities.
KARACHI: The Federal Tax Ombudsman (FTO) has launched investigation in a complaint received regarding sales tax collection through electricity bills.
The FTO Friday issued notices to Secretary, Revenue Division, Chief Commissioner and Commissioner Inland Revenue Large Taxpayers Office (LTO) Karachi, in the complaint filed by Mrs. Fauzia Salman against illegal and unlawful collection of taxes through electricity bills by K-Electric Limited.
The FTO has ordered to conduct an investigation into the complaint.
The tax office has been directed to submit reply to the allegation contained in the complaint by August 09, 2022.
Previously, the complainant sent a letter to K-Electric, the power supply utility in Karachi, and forwarded to the chairman of Federal Board of Revenue (FBR), Federal Ombudsman, and chambers of commerce, Fauzia pointed out that her company had received monthly electricity bill, which included: further tax at 3 per cent; extra tax/retail tax at 5 per cent; and newly introduced sales tax on retailers at Rs6,000 being an inactive taxpayer.
She claimed that the sales tax collection had been made in the bill for the month of July 2022 as her company was a legal service provider.
Furthermore, as per the record of the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) the law firm is an active taxpayer as per requirement under Income Tax Ordinance, 2001.
In her letter, she explained that Section 3(1A) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 relates to further tax (leviable where taxable supplies are made to a person who has not obtained registration number), Section 3(5) of the Act relates to Extra Tax (The government may imposed extra tax in addition to tax levied under sub section (1), (2) & (4) of Section 3) and Section 3(9) relates to sales tax on retailers, before and after the amendments made through Finance Act, 2022, under the Sales Tax Act, 1990 are applicable on the persons who is/are dealing in retail business of the taxable goods/supplies and required to be registered under the Act, 1990 but did not registered himself /themselves in FBR for the said purpose.
“Indeed, we [the law firm] are not dealing in supply /retail of taxable goods and as such you have wrongly levied and charged further tax u/s 3(1A), extra tax u/s 3(5) or 3(9) and retail tax u/s 3(9) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 through the Electric Bills,” according to the letter.
The law firm is only engaged in rendering of legal services on the subject premises, according to the letter.
Under the Sales Tax Act, 1990, neither the company is required to be registered with FBR nor various sales tax through electric bills i.e., Further Tax, Extra Tax and Retail Sales Tax are applicable on it, being a “Service Provider”.
Fauzia said that the K-Electric imposed the sales tax on the monthly bill on the basis of assumption that the commercial connection holder was a retailer.
“You [the K-Electric] have imposed two taxes under the single provision of law i.e., Section i.e., 3(9) of the Act, 1990 relying on prior and post amendment made in Section 3(9) of the Sales Tax Act 1990 through Finance Act, 2022 which cannot be permitted under the law to charge the taxpayer twice, even if it is applicable,” she pointed out towards important provisions of the law.
The relevant amendment made through Finance Act, 2022 in Section 3(9) of the Act, 1990 is reproduced here as under:-
Section 3(9),–
(i) for the words “five per cent where the monthly bill amount does not exceed rupees twenty thousand and at the rate of seven and half percent where the monthly bill amount exceeds the aforesaid amount”, the words “rupees three thousand per month where the monthly bill amount does not exceed rupees thirty thousand, rupees five thousand per month where the monthly bill amount exceeds rupees thirty thousand but does not exceed rupees fifty thousand and rupees ten thousand per month where the monthly bill amount exceeds rupees fifty thousand” shall be substituted;
(ii) after sub-section (9), the following provisos shall be inserted, namely:–
Provided that the above rates of tax shall be increased by one hundred percent if the name of the person is not appearing in the Active Taxpayers List issued by the Board under section 181A of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 on the date of issuance of monthly electricity bill:
Provided further that the Board may through a general order prescribe any persons or class of person who shall pay upto rupees two hundred thousand per month through their monthly electricity bill.
Despite having number of employees who are engaged in monitoring of meter or recording of energy consumption from meter installed on the subject premises, the utility provider has blatantly charged such taxes without verification of status whether the consumers is/are liable to be charged for such taxes or not.
It came to our knowledge from number of electricity consumers that the K Electric Limited has charged such taxes from all Commercial Consumers irrespective of their business status and FBR’s active taxpayer’s profile and treated all of them as “In-active Retailer of taxable goods” which cannot be justified or allowed under the Act, 1990.
Such an act of M/s K Electric Limited comes within the meaning of mal-administration as defined under Section 3 of the Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance, 2000.
ISLAMABAD: The President of Pakistan, Dr. Arif Alvi has rejected the plea of the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) in maladministration cases.
President Arif Alvi while upholding the decisions of Federal Tax Ombudsman regarding maladministration of FBR officials in processing refund cases has directed the FBR to implement FTO ‘s recommendations.
The departmental plea regarding bar on jurisdiction of FTO in such cases has also been set aside by the president .He has directed The commissioner –IR , Commission West ZONE Islamabad and commissioner I-R Enforcement 11- CTO Karachi their orders by exercising powers conferred U/S 122 A ,as per law and report compliance within 30 days.
In all three cases the background of the case was similar as under: In the first case pertaining to Sahiwal against order framed under section 170(4) of the income Tax Ordinance, 2001 (the ordinance) for tax year 2018 by commissioner I.R Sahiwal Nazir Ahmad Proprietor of M/s Bilal Commission Shop.
He filed a complaint before the Federal Tax Ombudsman against failure to dispose of refund application for tax year 2018 which was disposed of vide findings with the recommendations that FBR may direct the commissioner –IR, Sahiwal Zone to complete the verification and settle complainants refunds for tax years 2018,after providing him opportunity of hearing as per law.
In the second Case an individual filed return of income for tax year 2020 under section 114(1) of the ordinance claiming refund amounting to Rs 0.188 million and e-filed refund application for tax year 2020. He contended that the department issued notice under section 170(4) of the ordinance for functioning supporting evidence. Although short time was allowed but he made compliance whereas the unit officer without considering reply of the complainant passed the impugned order, in terms of section 170(4) of the ordinance whereby by the refund application was rejected. He therefore took up the matter with the Federal Tax Ombudsman by filing complaint under section.
Federal Tax Ombudsman thrashed the matter, directed FBR: It is an admitted position that the complaint e-filed refund application for tax year 2020. Evidently, the unit officer issued notice, under section 170(4) of the ordinance requiring the complainant to submit supporting evidence. Although the notice issued was in contravention of the FBR’S circular ,observed from perusal of the impugned order reflects that what to talk of providing statutory opportunity of impugned order passed under section 170 (4) of the ordinance.
In case No 3, Yousuf Irshad Hussain, (the complainant) a proprietor concern, filed returns of income for tax years 2016 to 2019 under section 114 (1) of the income tax ordinance ,2001 the ordinance claiming refund amounting to Rs 0.051 million, Rs 0.048 million, Rs 0.063 million and Rs 0.063 million and Rs 0.072 million.
He e-filed refund applications for tax years 2016 and 2019 along with evidence of tax deduction .however, despite his persistent efforts the zonal CIR failed to serve on the complainant orders in writing of the decisions in terms of section 170(4) of the ordinance within the stipulated time .he therefore took up the matter with FTO by filing complaint under section 10(1) of the FTO ordinance.
ISLAMABAD: The President of Pakistan, Dr. Arif Alvi, expressed dismay over misconduct of tax authorities with an 82 year old taxpayers in a refund case.
Dr. Alvi directed the chairman of the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) to look into the entire system of irresponsibility and corruption and take punitive action against the entire chain of decision makers involved in the case, a statement said on Sunday.
He took exception to the decision of FBR against a senior citizen that refused him to refund a paltry sum of Rs 2,333 on frivolous grounds and dragged him into unnecessary litigation spanning over a year.
Apologizing to the senior citizen Abdul Hamid Khan, the President said that our heads should hang in shame for the inconvenience caused by FBR to the senior citizen.
Abdul Hamid Khan (the complainant), a senior citizen of 82 years of age, had claimed a refund of Rs 2,333 on his income tax return for the year 2020 and submitted requisite documents of advance tax deduction of the PTCL and cell phone company bills on October 19, 2020.
The complainant e-filed refund application on October 19, 2020 followed by representation to FBR Chairman on December 24,2020.
The Unit officer of FBR rejected his refund claim, on January 29, 2021, on the grounds that the applicant had failed to furnish the original certificates required for authentication.
The complainant then took up the matter with the Federal Tax Ombudsman (FTO) to seek redressal of his complaint. The FTO investigated the matter and ordered FBR on June 02, 2021 to revisit the impugned order ,dated January 19, 2021, and pass a fresh order, under section 170(4) of the ordinance, after providing the complainant the opportunity for hearing as per law.
It further ordered to identify and initiate disciplinary proceedings against the official who passed the impugned order in derogation of the law and procedures and dragged the ageing taxpayer into unnecessary litigation as well as report compliance within 45 days.
Consequently, FBR filed a representation with the President against the original order of FTO on 24.06.2021. President Dr Arif Alvi rejected the representation of FBR.
The President said that the complainant had admittedly furnished copies of advance tax as per certificates collected by telephone authorities. In case the Unit Officer was not satisfied with the copies of certificates, he could have not only got the same verified from the PTCL and Cell Phone Company but verification was also possible through online system.
He observed that it was the responsibility of the duty officer to get the deduction of tax verified from the deducting authorities irrespective of certificates being original or copies/system generated, if the same were not reflecting in the system for one or the other reason.
The President termed the failure of the officer to verify the bills from PTCL and the cell phone company through the online system as shirking from responsibility and an act of maladministration.
He upheld that the act of the officer was a mockery and travesty of law, procedure and instructions of FBR.
It appeared that unlawful treatment was meted out in the instant case with a view to irritate and humiliate the ageing pensioner.
While rejecting the representation of FBR, the President said that this must be the most pitiful and shameful use of bureaucratic authority and regretted that the FBR official had wasted the time of his department, the Tax Ombudsman and the President of Pakistan over a paltry sum of Rs 2,333 and the matter had lingered for over a year.
He also deplored that no one in the long chain of bureaucrats in FBR deliberated over the issue to take note of the unfairness, pettiness and superfluousness of the matter.
“Punitive action must be taken along the entire line of decision-makers in this case and Chairman FBR should ensure that those responsible, in particular, and others, in general, go through courses to teach them priorities and courtesies,” he directed.
ISLAMABAD: The Federal Tax Ombudsman (FTO) has ordered the customs authorities to dispose of 8,522 pending auctions of goods and vehicles within two months.
In pursuance of an own motion investigation, the FTO also directed the Member Customs to personally monitor the compliance of above directions and initiate disciplinary proceedings against the Collectors/Directors who fail to comply with the above directions.
Reportedly, the own motion investigations were initiated by the Federal Tax Ombudsman on the reports regarding large quantity of confiscated or otherwise uncleared goods and vehicles laying un-disposed at Customs formations all over the country, involving stuck up revenue of billions of rupees.
The Customs Laws, Rules, Customs General Orders (CGOs) and instructions provide for expeditious disposal and auctions of such goods and vehicles, however, the Customs authorities are not disposing these goods and vehicles having tampered and non-tampered chassis numbers as required under the law.
The data pertaining to the un-disposed lots ripe for auction was collected for the analysis purposes by FTO which revealed that a total of 8522 lots are un-disposed and still pending in auction.
The reason intimated by FBR, was that satisfactory bids have not been received against the reserve price fixed for these lots.
So much so that at certain Customs Collectorates, the goods/vehicles have been offered for auction upto 40 times but still not disposed of. In addition to this alarming pendency in case of auctionable lots, other non-auctionable goods and cut & weld/tempered vehicles are also not being disposed of.
The above has resulted into non realization of huge government revenue and piling up of un-disposed goods ripe for auction at various Customs Warehouses across the country. FTO has directed the FBR to do away with the huge pendency of auctionable goods/vehicles within 60 days.
Furthermore, Member Customs (Operations) is to personally monitor the above activity and disciplinary action to be initiated under E&D rules 2020 against the Collectors/Directors who fails to comply this direction.
FTO also ordered Customs field offices to ensure that Collectors/Directors get the reserve price of the lots revised after every three consecutive auctions, if found undisposed and incorporation of provision to this effect under the Rule 58(2A) of the Customs Rules.
FTO also ordered Chief (F&C) Customs to circulate the lists of tempered/ cut & weld vehicles to all other departments on monthly basis for allotment under the Customs procedures along with the inclusion of registered Philanthropic Organizations of good standing, for allocation of these vehicles in pursuance of their philanthropic activities.
KARACHI: The Karachi Tax Bar Association (KTBA) on Tuesday passed a resolution against the statement of Federal Tax Ombudsman (FTO) Dr. Asif Mahmood Jah.
Following is the text of the resolution:
Karachi Tax Bar Association (KTBA) expresses its deep disapproval and condemnation for recent jibes by the Federal Tax Ombudsman Pakistan (FTO), Dr. Asif Mahmood Jah. The statement made by the FTO lately televised on electronic media / uploaded on social media is offensive towards the taxpayers and manifests his nepotism and biased approach in the discharge of his official duties. The arbitrary and belligerent statement by the FTO is not only contrary to his oath prescribed in Schedule via Section 3(2) of Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance, 2000 read with Section 8 of Federal Ombudsmen Institutional Reforms Act, 2013 but also makes him guilty of misconduct that renders him incapable of holding public office anymore.
The entire tax fraternity is in a fix over the rude and offensive remarks of Dr. Asif Mahmood Jah and demands his immediate resignation from the office of FTO. Nonetheless, by way of this resolution, we ask the Hon’ble President of Pakistan to remove him from his office in the exercise of his powers vested U/s. 6(2) of FTO Ordinance, 2000 else a reference against him may be sent to Supreme Judicial Council under the recourse of Section 5 of FTO Institutional Reforms Act, 2013 immediately.
We believe the statement has eroded the already depleting confidence of the taxpayers and the tax consultants in the office of Federal Tax Ombudsman which had bluntly been submissive towards the Department and have shied away for not (i) allowing a stay of recovery/injunctions to the complainants: Section 10 and 11; (ii) avoiding defiance proceeding against tax collectors: Section 12; and (iii) punish tax collectors for contempt: Section 16 and 12 ibid for obvious reasons.
On a final note, the KTBA urges the Federal Law Ministry that rules may be prescribed to desist induction of the retired FBR officials in the official of Federal Tax Ombudsman for the sake of transparency and propriety.
The suggestion has been made to make adjudication more fair, neutral, transparent, and competent resolution.
According to a statement issued on Wednesday, the FPCCI President Mian Nasser Hyatt Maggo presented the suggestion while speaking on the occasion of Dr. Asif Mahmood Jah, FTO Pakistan, visit to FPCCI Head Office in Karachi.
He said that FPCCI appreciates FTO’s recent notice and report on the misuse of powers by the officials of the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) in issuing fake notices and accessing the bank accounts of the taxpayers unnecessarily.
Maggo apprised the audience that it has been FPCCI’s longstanding demand to have a well-reputed, fearless, competent, and senior officer appointed as FTO Pakistan.
Highlighting the major issues with income tax cases, FPCCI President said that discrimination, delay, injustice, non-transparency and non-payment of refunds are plaguing the taxation system of the country and that is the reason FPCCI recommends sweeping reforms in the system.
Hanif Lakhany, Vice President FPCCI, said that the business community is, for the first time, feeling secure and protected against the tax and customs officials’ harassment and highhandedness; due to the fair redressal by the office of FTO. He also thanked the government for having the right man for the right job.
Nasir Khan, Vice President FPCCI, expressed his satisfaction over the performance of the office of FTO; but, maintained that the tax and customs authorities use time-delay and procrastinating tactics to avoid swift redressal of the issues of business, industry and trade community. In order to resolve these grievances, FTO should be given the authority to reprimand and punish corrupt officers.
FTO Dr. Asif Mahmood Jah apprised the audiences on the mandate and the performance of the Federal Tax Ombudsman.
He said that 90% of the complaints by the business community go in their favor on average. The complainants have the option of appealing to FTO or of even filing a representation with the constitutional office of the President of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
Dr. Asif Mahmood Jah added that FTO can not directly reprimand the tax and customs officials; but, he can make his observations on misuse of powers, maladministration, anomalies, harassment and corruption; and, those are taken seriously.
Another limitation of the FTO is that we can not take up cases that have been already taken up by any court of law and are subjudice. Explaining the other functions of the institution of FTO, Dr. Jah said that inspections, own-motion actions and research are also mandated.
Dr. Asif Mahmood Jah also stated that he wants to expedite the turnaround time for the resolution of complaints from 60 days to 60 hours. He also agreed to FPCCI’s demand of setting up help desks at FPCCI offices in Karachi, Lahore and Islamabad.
ISLAMABAD: Federal Tax Ombudsman (FTO) has directed the tax authorities to expedite setting up Customs laboratories at collectorates.
In its recommendations, the FTO office directed the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) to expedite the task of setting up of customs laboratories in the remaining customs collectorates and upgradation of existing customs labs as per international best practices.
The FBR has also been advised to assign administrative control to Member (Customs) to save the lab officials from local pressures.
The FTO made this recommendations in an own motion investigation initiative to investigate systemic maladministration of the Customs Administration for failing to establish customs laboratories in the Customs Collectorates as per World Customs Organization (WCO) guidelines, besides failure to upgrade the existing customs lab functioning at MCC Karachi, Lahore and Faisalabad.
Absence of quality laboratory facilities not only compromise collection of legitimate due government revenue but also put at risk import/export controls, environmental protection, control of dangerous goods.
The FBR responded to the FTO notice that the existing Customs lab at Karachi had been upgraded and more than 95 per cent of items, such as textile fabrics, yarn, chemicals, dyes, petroleum hydrocarbons, pharmaceutical materials and metals etc. are conducted there. “Few samples were, however, forwarded to other labs, like HEJ Research Institute of Chemistry and PCSIR…”
Crux of the investigation is that necessary actions have been initiated by the FBR, after initiation of the investigation, through constituting a committee on June 16, 2021, to examine the proposals for setting up modern Customs labs in the remaining Customs Collectorates as well as upgrading the existing labs as per the best international practices.
2. The President Federation of Pakistan Chamber of Commerce & Industry, Federation House, Main Clifton, Block-5, Abdullah Shah Ghazi Road, Karachi : Member
3. The President, Karachi Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Aiwan-E-Tijarat Road, Off: Shahrah-e-Liaquat, P.O.Box No. 4138 Karachi : Member
4. The President Women Chamber of Commerce & Industry, Karachi South #4, Plot # 1-C, Lane # 2sehar Commercial Area Phase-VII, D.H.A. Karachi : Member
5. The Chief Executive, Karachi Women Chamber of Commerce & Industry, District East Plot #391, Block # 3, 6th Floor office # 604, Al Reef Tower, Salamgir Road Karachi
6. The President, The American Business Council of Pakitan 155-C 4th Floor Almurtaza Commercial Lane – 2 DHA Phase 8-A Karachi : Member
7. The President, Overseas Investors Chamber of Commerce & Industry Chamber of Commerce Building, Talpur Road Karachi : Member
8. Chairman, Air Cargo Agents Association Of Pakistan, suite No. 305, 3rd Floor, Fortune Centre, 45-A, Block 6, P.E.C.H.S., Sharah-e-Faisal, Karachi : Member
9. Chairman, All Pakistan Fruit & Vegetables Exporters, Importers & Merchants Association House No. 175, C.P. Berar Society block 7/8 Karachi : Member
10. Chairman Customs Agents Association Room No. 7/8, Bombay Plaza Mezzanine Floor, Bohri Road Opp. New Custom House, Karachi : Member
11. Chairman All Pakistan Shipping Association Room No. 712, 7th Floor, Business Centre, Mumtaz Hassan Road Karachi : Member
12. Chairman, Pak Readymade Garments Manufacturers & Exporters Association 3rd Floor, Plot # 57-C 24th Commercial Street Phase II (Ext), D.H.A. Karachi : Member
13. The Chairman, Pakistan Bedwear Exporters Association 245-1V, Block 6, P.E.C.H.S. Karachi : Member
14. The Chairman, Pakistan Leather Garments Manufacturers & Exporters Association, St # 20, Central Avenue, Sector, 7/A Korangi Industrial Area, Karachi : Member
15. The President, Karachi Tax Bar Association, Strachan Road, Saddar Karachi : Member
16. The President, Sukkur Chamber of Commerce & Industry 1st Floor, Sukkur Chamber House, Bunder Road Sukkur : Member
17. President Hyderabad Chamber of Small Traders and Small Industry Naz & Bilal, Shopping Mall 41/499/1, Mezzanine Floor, Saddar Hyderabad : Member
18. The President, Pak-Iran Joint Chamber of Commerce and Industry Jk Plaza, Plot No. 06 Zonki Ram Road, Tamir-e-Nau Masjid Quetta : Member
19. The President, Chaman Chamber of Commerce & Industry Commerce House, Trunch Road, Chaman : Member
20. The President, Gwadar Chamber of Commerce & Industry GCCI, Civic Center airport Road Gwadar : Member
21. Chairman Pakistan Carpet Manufacturers & Exporters Association 23-D, Block # 6, P.E.C.H.S. Shahrah-E-Faisal Karachi : Member
22. Chairman, Pakistan Chemicals & Dyes Merchants’ Association PCDMA House, Rambharti Street, Jodia Bazar Karachi : Member
23. Chairman, Pakistan Waste Products Association, 7/12-A, Rimpa Plaza, M.A. Jinnah Road Karachi : Member
24. Mr. Adnan Mufti, Chartered Accountant, Moore Sheikha Mufti, C-253, PECHS, Block-6, Karachi : Member
25. Mr. Muhammad Ali, Sr. Reporter, Business Recorder, R-1367/15, Federal B. Area, Karachi : Member
26. Mr. Asif Haroon, FCA, State Life Building No. 1-C, I.I, Chundrigar, City Railway Colony, Karachi : Member
27. Mr. Shahnawaz Akhtar, Sr. Staff Correspondent, Bol News, Bol Headquarter, Bol Road, Karachi : Member
28. Mr. Ashraf Khan, Sr. Correspondent, 24 News, DHA Phase 2 Ext, Karachi : Member
29. Mr. Asif Inam, Chairman South Zone APTMA House, 44-A, Street No. 01, Molvi Tamizauddin Khan Road, Lalazar, Karachi : Member
30. Chief (IR-Policy) – IR, FBR (HQ), Islamabad : Member
31. Chief (ST-Operations) IR, FBR (HQ), Islamabad : Member
32. Chief (Tariff) –Customs, FBR (HQ), Islamabad : Member
33. Mr. Shahid Ahmad, Advisor (Customs), FTO Secretariat, R.O. Karachi : Member
34. Mr. Manzoor Hussain Memon, Advisor (Customs), FTO Secretariat, R.O. Karachi : Member
35. Mr. Badruddin Ahmad Qureshi, Advisor, FTO Secretariat, R.O. Karachi : Member
36. Justice (R) Muhammad Nadir Khan, Advisor Incharge, FTO Secretariat, R.O. Quetta : Member
The Chairman of the Advisory Committee may co-opt any person for assistance of the Committee as per need.
Due to budgetary constraints, the FTO Secretariat will not be able to bear the expenses relating to participation of the Members in the Advisory Committee Meetings.
The Federal Tax Ombudsman (FTO) has taken swift action in response to a complaint against customs authorities, addressing unnecessary delays in the clearance of a consignment. The complainant, a regular importer of Agricultural Tractors, reported that the customs authorities had unjustifiably halted the clearance of a shipment of tractors destined for use by farmers in the country.
