Justice has been done? Malik Riaz gets away with Rs 119.4bn evaded in taxes ISLAMABAD: President Asif Ali Zardari has reportedly set aside the report of the Suddle Commission in the Arsalan Iftikhar case, and given a clean chit to property tycoon Malik Riaz in the alleged tax evasion of more than Rs 119 billion. According to reports citing official documents of the Presidency, the president accepted the representation of Malik Riaz and set aside the December 4, 2012 impugned decision of the federal tax ombudsman (FTO). The Supreme Court had formed the Suddle Commission to investigate the alleged Rs 342 million business deal between Chief Justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Chaudhry’s son Dr Arsalan Iftikhar and Malik Riaz. In its interim findings, the commission had implicated Malik Riaz in massive tax evasion of Rs 119.4 billion, and recommended the imposition of a penalty for concealing assets in wealth statements filed with the income tax returns. According to the documents, a joint representation was filed by Malik Riaz Hussain and the Bahria Town (pvt) Ltd principal officer under Section 14(1) of the Federal Ombudsman Institutional Reform Act 2013, and the president’s order conveyed that the representation had been filed, questioning an order passed by the FTO in suo motu. The notice and the representation showed that the suo motu case regarding the allegation of the business deal between Malik Riaz and Dr Arslan Iftikhar – attempting to influence the judicial process – was disposed of by the Supreme Court of Pakistan on June 14, 2012, with directions to the attorney general of Pakistan to set state machinery in motion so that “all those who may have committed any illegal acts, including Malik Riaz, Dr Arslan Iftikhar and Salman Ali Khan, are pursued and brought to book with full force and rigor of the law”. The attorney general wrote a letter to the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) chairman on June 18, 2012 in this regard. Later, Dr Arslan Iftikhar filed CRP No 167/2012, which was allowed by the Supreme Court on August 30, 2012. The FTO was appointed as a one-man commission, who was to hold an inquiry into the matter. The documents stated that the commission submitted three inquiry reports. Upon receiving the third interim report, it was observed that the commission was no longer required to pursue further in its inquiry, and the matter was disposed of. According to the FTO Ordinance 2000, the job of the FTO is to diagnose, investigate, redress and rectify any injustice done to a person through maladministration by functionaries administering tax laws. Citing the law, the primary objection raised in the representation was that the federal tax ombudsman did not have any jurisdiction to commence suo motu proceedings and issue notices to the petitioners. The Presidency’s letter argued that the term maladministration has been defined in Section 2(3) of the said ordinance, while Section 9(1) confers jurisdiction upon the tax ombudsman to investigate any allegation of maladministration on the part of the Revenue Division or any tax employee, and this he can inter alia do on his own motion. When the Law and Justice Division sought the comments of the FTO, the FTO Secretariat reported on March 16, 2013 that proceedings were being taken only against the maladministration of the FBR, and that any action under the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 was to be taken by the board. Section 32 of FTO Ordinance, 2000 reads, “The Revenue Division or any person aggrieved by a recommendation of the federal tax ombudsman may, within thirty days of the recommendation, make a representation to the president who may pass such order thereon as he may deem fit.” Earlier, the petitioners filed an application, challenging the said order, and a consequent notice was issued to the FTO. The matter was processed by the Law and Justice Division, which concluded that the action was ultra vires and void. “The representation, therefore, is competent at this stage... This secretariat agreed with the said conclusion,” read the report citing the documents of the Presidency. “It appears that the FTO has taken upon himself to continue with the proceedings conducted as a one-man commission, which is beyond the ambit of the FTO Ordinance 2000,” the letter states. “The proceedings initiated and the notice issued, therefore, is without jurisdiction. The FTO Secretariat has not filed any comments despite notice. In its response to earlier petition, the FTO Secretariat had given out that the case is only against maladministration of the FBR... Accordingly, the president has been pleased to accept representation and to set aside impugned decision of FTO commencing proceeding against the petitioners on the basis of third interim report.” dailytimes.pk/default.asp?page=2013 722story_22-7-2013_pg1_6
Posted on: Sun, 21 Jul 2013 22:06:53 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015