ISLAMABAD: The Senate Standing Committee on Finance and Revenue has reviewed the utilization of budgetary allocations by the Inland Revenue department of the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR), Customs until February 2017. This review is required under the Rule 166 (4) of the rules of procedures and conduct of the business of the Senate 2012.
The Senate Finance and Revenue committee met here with the Chairman Senator Salim Mandviwala in the chair, and expressed satisfaction over the use of budgetary allocations and their utilization by the efficient management of the FBR and subsidiary departments.
In this regard, the committee member lauded the financial management along with appropriate utilization of the funds released by the Finance Division to the FBR.
In result of mediation and reconciliatory efforts of the members of the Senate Finance and Revenue committee, PTI Senator Azam Sawati, Friday, withdrew his private members’ bill. The bill has sought certain amendments in the Anti-Money Laundering Amendment Act 2017.
While taking detailed review of the moved bill, the Finance Ministry and Federal Board Revenue (FBR) officials pressed that the proposed bill had no validity because quite effective and relevant legislation already existed in the country.
The statement of objects and reasons of the bill moved by Azam Swati stated that in Pakistan there were many people who were involved in money laundering but due to lack of evidence the higher authorities were unable to take any action against them, and there was no strictness in the law that’s why these people were causing harm to economy of the country and also to the public money.
It further stated that for the purpose of preventing money laundering and transferring public money to the foreign banks by illegal means from the country, the law must be strict so that the higher authorities may take full action against those who are involved in this offence.
According to Azam Swati, the amendment bill had proposed the words “which shall not be less than one year but may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to fine which may extend to one million rupees” the words “which shall not be less than ten years but may extend to imprisonment for life or with fine which shall not be less than ten million rupees but may extend to twenty five million rupees or with both” shall be substituted; and in the proviso for the words “five million rupees” the words “fifty million rupees” shall be substituted.
“This Bill has been designed to achieve aforementioned purpose” he told this scribe here after the meeting of the committee.
