One of the top body of government responsible for enforcing fiscal laws and collecting revenue in the coutnry – Federal Board of Revenue – has been asked to appoint a focal person for coordination on tax related adjudications which are pending before superior and sub-ordinate courts.
Office of the Chief Law Officer – Attorney General for Pakistan – communicated to the Chairman FBR office saying there is dire need for institutional arrangments to address backlog of tax cases in the coutnry, involving more than one ministry.
In a letter to the FBR chairman, the AGP office pointed out several reasons that caused delay in the disposal of tax-related matters in court. The letter pointed out that in cases involving over Rs1 billion taxes, replies from the industries ministry and the revenue division conflicted with each other.
The government says there are tax cases amounting to Rs2,700 billion in courts and appellate forums pending decisions. Last month the National Assembly passed the Tax Laws (Amendment) Act 2024, aimed at expedite the recovery process of the trillions or rupees held up in litigations.
In order to expedite the legal procedure, the AGP’s office recommended a more unified approach by engaging a single senior and competent lawyer for similar or connected matters, which would reduce legal complexities, and lower legal expenses, benefiting both the judiciary and the exchequer.
While referring to the case of more than Rs1 billion, pending in the Supreme Court, the AGP office letter said that in these cases, the industry ministry and the revenue division filed conflicting replies, on which the court expressed displeasure.
The letter suggested that in the matter involving two ministries, the court reply should be filed by the AGP Office. It also suggested to the FBR chairman to appoint a focal person on the litigation matters for a better coordination.
According to the AGP office, there was a lack of coordination in hiring different lawyers for the same applications, which caused delay in the disposal of the cases, on the one hand, while it incurred more expenses, on the other, leading to the waste of public money.
Furthermore, the letter said, various departments of the FBR did not provide copies of their replies to the court to the AGP office. In the absence of the reply’s copy, the AGP office would not be able to properly assist the court.
According to the text of the letter, it had been observed that in many cases, the FBR was not represented in the court despite repeated notices. Therefore, the letter said, the FBR should nominated an officer of at least Grade-18 to represent various departments of the FBR in courts.
The FBR was also suggested to ensure that there were no conflicting opinions in the replies submitted to the court by the various ministries, issue instructions to all departments to file immediate appeals against the decisions of the tribunals and seek injunction against the decision.
