FBR is in shambles: CJP Gulzar

Justice Gulzar Ahmed asks tax authority to report regarding Rs90m corruption case

Our Correspondent ​ September 26, 2019
The Supreme Court of Pakistan. PHOTO: AFP

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Thursday directed the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) to submit a report regarding measures taken to recover tax money from the FBR officials who received undue tax refunds by establishing three fake companies in Karachi.

A two-member bench, comprising Justice Gulzar Ahmad, the acting chief justice of Pakistan, and Justice Munib Akhtar heard the case involving a corruption of Rs90 million.

The FBR Chairman Shabbar Zaidi told the court that the three accused – Munirullah, Abdul Hameed Anjum and Dr Ishfaq Ghani, all FBR officials – were involved in the crime and a summary had been forwarded to the prime minister office in order to initiate an inquiry against Dr Ishfaq.

FBR teams visit markets in Lahore

He said an FBR Tribunal had reinstated Abdul Hameed Anjum.
Justice Gulzar, grilling the FBR authorities for submitting unsatisfactory reply, said the FBR is trying to protect its officers and a huge amount of Rs90 million has been sacrificed.

“Who minted this money? Who would recover these Rs90 million? Only removal from service is not enough,” the judge said, adding: “The FBR is shambles.”

He asked the FBR chairman if there is any punishment in the rules against those who caused loss of Rs90 million or do they just recommend removal of such officials from service.

Tax exemption draft for Gwadar port, free zone prepared by ECC

The FBR authorities replied that only punishment was provided in the rules.

The acting chief justice said those who were found guilty of creating fake companies to commit tax fraud could be sentenced to jail for up to five years, in addition, be ordered to pay back money they received as refunds.

The court told FBR chairman to additionally submit a written report of developments in the case in two weeks.

The FBR chairman asked for more time but the request was declined. Hearing of the case was adjourned for three months.


Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ