ECONOMY PESTICIDES CHOTI ZAREEN, DERA GHAZI KHAN versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD
Section 7 and 45A tax liabilities were determined by adjustments in the input tax against purchases made available to the Federal Board of Revenue, as such purchases were not announced on the supply bank's sales tax return and check / demand. Copies of the draft / pay orders were provided. In response to the notice of cause and it was claimed that payment was made by the bank to the supplier under Section 73 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, the approval of the checks was not disclosed in the bank statement, Was to provide a sales tax return, did not actually order, was also approved for payment of tax along with the penalty. The complainant claimed that the property was issued by the supplier and the payment was made by the bank. Was done Copies of bank statements and receipts were not considered on merit. This requirement to generate a sales tax return of the supplier was not met. That such documents should have been obtained directly from the supplier rather than compelling the complainant. And that the orders were actually passed without considering the evidence or approving them for independent verification, which equates to corruption. Did not reflect the tax officer should directly confirm the transaction, which was not done from the bank, no purchase was confirmed from the supplier and instead the order was originally approved as original. Such an act of order passing was the same as the mismanagement of the Federal Tax Ombudsman
Related judgments — Federal Tax Ombudsman Pakistan, 2013
