SHAHZAD ANWAR SHEIKH versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD
Offices 37 and 38 of the Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance Office (2000 XXV), Sections 2 (3), 9 and 11 business transactions that were not with the blacklisted suppliers who did not collect output tax were issued notices. The notice was issued in which the business transaction was with four. Blacklist, suppliers who did not submit to the complainant the output tax notice issued under Sections 37 and 38 of the Sales Tax Act 1990, the complainant filed a complaint and the complainant admitted that he had The sales tax payment to the supplier was completely cash. All transactions were less than Rs 50,000 while payment should have been made through banking channels which it was suspected to be unusual that each transaction was done in less than Rs 50,000, The cash transaction paper is tried to avoid leaving the trail. Failure to produce the required documents and not appearing to the Investigation Authority in person, many questions remain. The alleged interference was not answered when a person had nothing to hide, then the investigating authority There should be no hesitation in presenting all the records before and issuing notices to the complainant for clarification on all relevant matters has been issued in the context of the ongoing investigation in this case. Invalid invoice scandal does not equate to mismanagement The Federal Board of Revenue was instructed to ensure that a lawful investigation of false invoice scams is completed \ r \ n
Related judgments — Federal Tax Ombudsman Pakistan, 2012
