ISLAMABAD: A single bench of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) has dated in the office the hearing of M/s Fauji Fertilizer Company Limited’s tax matter with directives to submit record by the next date of hearing.
The bench, comprising Justice Aamer Farooq, heard the case and adjourned it seeking provision of more record on the matter.
M/s Fauji Fertilizer Company Limited had challenged a show cause notice issued by the Large Taxpayers Unit, Islamabad.
The ATIR was also made respondent in the case as the tribunal had sustained departmental decision regarding issuance of show cause notice and demand of recovery of outstanding tax amount in head of federal excise duty (FED).
M/s Fauji Fertilizer Company Limited had prayed the court that FBR office had issued a recovery notice to the company which did not hold lawful grounds.
The appellant had prayed the court to declare the act as illegal and without any lawful authority and an interim stay may be granted against recovery proceedings.
M/s Fauji Fertilizer Company Limited had also mentioned that departmental obligations were not met amid processing the notice of recovery demand while later the adjudication did not address grievances of the appellant.
Earlier the court had adjourned hearing on the matter with directions to ensure presence before the court on date of hearing.
Months ago, M/s Fauji Fertilizer Company Limited had also contested another tax matter wherein the court had decided in its favor. IHC had then barred Federal Board of Revenue from recovering liable tax amount of Rs 1,412,291,114 from the company.
The court also directed the Large Taxpayers’ Unit, Islamabad of Federal Board of Revenue to decide M/s Fauji Fertilizer Limited’s departmental appeal pending before the commissioner appeals within 60 days.
The LTU had issued the notice for tax year 2012, dated March 3, 2016, in head of sales tax under provisions of Sales Tax Act, 1990.
In its decision, the bench had also restricted the FBR’s field office, LTU, form recovering the said amount till deciding the departmental appeal of appellant. The appellant had made FBR, and officers of LTU, respondents in the case.
