HCSTSI says concerned at FBR's ‘excessive' powers
HYDERABAD: President Hyderabad Chamber of Small Traders & Small Industry (HCSTSI), Muhammad Saleem Memon, has expressed grave concern over the excessive, unilateral and unbalanced powers granted to the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) through the SRO and Ordinance issued on May 2, 2025.
He stated that these amendments, although introduced under the guise of improving tax collection, could in reality open a new chapter of harassment and uncertainty for Pakistan's business community. The changes stand in contradiction to the principles of justice, due process, and economic freedom.
Chamber President Saleem Memon pointed out that under the newly inserted Sections 138(3A) and 140(6A) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, if a matter is adjudicated by a higher court, the tax liability will become immediately enforceable. FBR will then have the authority to freeze bank accounts and recover the dues without prior notice or legal proceedings. This is an alarming provision that undermines the constitutional and legal rights of taxpayers, depriving them of the opportunity to defend, appeal, or clarify violating fundamental principles of natural justice.
He further highlighted that Section 175C grants FBR or the Chief Commissioner the authority to deploy officers at any business premises, including shops or factories, to monitor the production of goods, services, or stock. This, he stated, is a form of coercion and interference in business operations. The physical presence of tax officers will not only create a hostile environment but will also instil fear and mistrust among entrepreneurs, ultimately disrupting routine commercial activities.
Expressing reservations about the amendments to the Federal Excise Act, 2005, Saleem Memon noted that while the criminalization of counterfeit stamps, barcodes, and labels may be justified in principle, it must also be recognized that in many cases, such errors can be unintentional caused by technical glitches, printing issues, or logistical challenges. Such unintended mistakes could easily be misused by officials as grounds for excessive action and harassment.
The HCSTSI president also criticized the manner in which these sweeping changes were introduced. He lamented that the amendments were enforced immediately through Ordinance without parliamentary debate, stakeholder consultation, or committee review. This lack of democratic process and transparency is deeply disappointing and detrimental to the trust between the government and the business community.
In light of these developments, Muhammad Saleem Memon made a strong appeal to the Prime Minister of Pakistan, the Federal Minister of Finance, and the Chairman of FBR to immediately review these amendments and establish clear guidelines to restrict the misuse of authority by FBR officials. He proposed the following key measures to restore balance and fairness:
A minimum 15-day written notice must be mandatory before freezing any bank account to give the taxpayer an opportunity to clarify or respond.
Deployment of tax officers in business premises should be subject to judicial approval to prevent arbitrary actions. An independent grievance redressal cell must be established to address business community complaints in a timely and transparent manner.
No new regulations should be implemented without the prior consultation of stakeholders, particularly representatives of small traders and industries.
He alarmed that ignoring the legitimate concerns of the business sector will severely erode confidence across the country, damaging not only the economic environment but also the government's own revenue collection targets. He added that instead of burdening existing taxpayers, the government should focus on expanding the tax net to include untaxed segments of the economy.
Chamber President concluded by urging the federal government to reconsider these amendments urgently and revive the consultation process with the business community to build a fair, transparent and progressive economic environment in Pakistan.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Recorder
11 hours ago
- Business Recorder
WHT regime: Finance Bill will introduce major changes
ISLAMABAD: Finance Bill (2025-26) will introduce major changes in withholding tax regime in budget (2025-26) to generate additional revenue. According to sources, the difference of withholding taxes between filers and non-filers would be further widened from next fiscal year. The heavy reliance on withholding taxes would continue in the next fiscal year. The withholding taxes (collected in sales tax mode) constitute over 70 percent of the direct taxes collection. One of the proposals under consideration is to raise tax rate on interest income. Cash withdrawals from banks: FBR proposes raise in WHT for non-filers The Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) has proposed to raise withholding tax on cash withdrawal from the banks by non-filers from 0.6 percent to 1 to 1.2 percent. Another proposal is to impose 1.5 percent withholding tax on the value of imports. The rates of Withholding Tax on immovable properties are expected to be rationalized in the upcoming budget (2025-26) to facilitate buyers and sellers of real estate sector from July 1 2025. Other proposals under consideration included raise in withholding tax on supplies, services and contracts. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
11 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Amendments to orders for accuracy: Commissioner IR has powers under Sec 221(1) of IT law: SC
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court ruled that the Commissioner Inland Revenue has jurisdiction under Section 221(1) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 to amend the orders by rectifying any mistake apparent from the record. The 24-page judgment, authored by Justice Munib Akhtar, set aside the impugned judgments of the Lahore High Court (LHC) and the Islamabad High Court (IHC). It held; 'the tax references out of which these matters arise shall be deemed pending in the respective High Courts and the questions of law raised therein decided in accordance with law and consistently with this judgment.' Section 122 (5A) ITO: Power granted to IR commissioners is not without boundaries: ATIR 'CPLA 431-L/2023 involves questions of law other than the one decided by this judgment. This leave petition is returned to the office to be fixed in the ordinary course before an appropriate Bench,' it also said. A three-judge bench, headed by Justice Munib Akhtar, and comprising Justice Ayesha A Malik and Justice Shahid Waheed heard the department (FBR) petitions against the LHC and IHC decisions. Babar Bilal appeared in CPLA Nos.4583 to 4585/2023. The judgment noted that the matters relating to the deemed assessment order (and indeed, the deemed amended assessment order) fall only and always within the first part (of Mehreen Zaibun Nisa), with all ensuing 'inevitable corollaries' applying accordingly. One of these is that the deemed orders of both kinds must be regarded as orders 'passed' by the Commissioner within the meaning, and for the purposes of, Section 221(1). 'The Commissioner therefore has the jurisdiction to amend the orders by rectifying any mistake apparent from the record'. The judgment decided the question; 'Whether the Commissioner has jurisdiction under subsection (1) of Section 221 of the 2001 Ordinance to amend, in exercise of the power thereby conferred and, in the manner, and to the extent therein stated, what is known as a deemed assessment order under s. 120 to rectify a mistake apparent from the record?', in favour of the Commissioner and against the taxpayers. The High Courts had answered the question in the negative. The Department urged that both the courts erred materially in this regard. The taxpayers pray that the impugned judgments be upheld as having reached the correct conclusion in law. The judgment confirmed that the error made by the High Courts was to conflate the two deeming provisions into one. It was on account of this mistake that both judgments, whose reasoning run in parallel, concluded that there was no application of mind by the Commissioner and that the mistake always lay where, and by whom, in fact made, i.e., the taxpayer. However, once this unfortunate fusing is unpacked, and what the subsection actually does and require is realized, the mistake becomes apparent. Had the subsection only contained the deeming required by clause (b), then there could be merit to what the learned High Courts concluded. In such a situation, the only 'state of affairs' required to be imagined would be the deemed issuance of an assessment order. It could perhaps then be said that the deeming did not reach or touch any mistake to be found as a matter of fact in the return, and hence the deemed assessment order did not deal with any such thing. In this situation the attribution of the mistake, being outside the scope (or beyond the limit) of the legal fiction could be said to lie where, and by whom, actually made as a matter of fact. But that of course is not the case. There is also the (precedent) deeming required by clause (a). Once that is kept in mind then the inevitable conclusion is that there was, as a matter of law, a (deemed) application of mind by the Commissioner. Since it operated (as it could only) on the return, an inevitable corollary is that it is the whole of it, mistakes and all, that is the assessment (deemed) to have been made. And it is the (deemed) assessment so made that then results in the (deemed) issuance of the assessment order. In our view, it is only in terms of this bifurcation that subsection (1) can be properly understood and applied. A rolling up of the two clauses into one, with respect, led to the error into which both the learned High Courts fell. Thus, in the principal LHC judgment much emphasis was placed on s. 221(1) requiring that the order be 'passed' by the Commissioner. The matters before the Supreme Court arose under the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 in relation to the jurisdiction, under subsection (1) of Section 221, of the Commissioner to rectify any mistake apparent on the face of the record and thereby amend what is known as a deemed assessment order under s. Most of these matters come from the Lahore High Court, where the principal judgment is dated 27.04.2022. That decision disposed of eight tax references that had been filed by the Commissioner and was followed in all the other matters in the said High Court by various orders of different dates. Islamabad High Court, where the principal judgment is dated 20.09.2023 which disposed of tax references filed by the Department. Both High Courts reached the same conclusion on the question now before the Court and therefore, all these matters were heard together and are being decided by this judgment. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
11 hours ago
- Business Recorder
HCSTSI suggests targeted relief steps to boost economy
HYDERABAD: The President of Hyderabad Chamber of Small Traders & Small Industry (HCSTSI), Muhammad Saleem Memon, has formally submitted comprehensive budget proposals to the Federal Finance Minister ahead of the Federal Budget 2025–26, urging targeted relief measures for small traders, industrialists, and exporters to boost economic resilience and national growth. Memon emphasised that strengthening the business sector especially SMEs is vital to ensuring long-term economic stability. He stated that this is a critical opportunity for the government to stand firmly with the business community, especially amid ongoing tensions with neighbouring India, and send a strong message of national unity and economic strength to the global community. He stressed the urgent need to empower SMEs by maintaining tax exemptions on solar and wind energy, and by granting subsidies on electricity and gas tariffs. These measures, he explained, would help lower production costs and make Pakistani goods more competitive in international markets. To further support the sector, he called for easy access to low-interest loans, skill development He asked to allocate funds for the rehabilitation of SITE Area Hyderabad, especially road repairs, drainage, and water supply systems. He recommended a notable reduction in interest rates to encourage industrial growth and new ventures. On the export front, he proposed relaxing advance tax requirements, introducing export development schemes, and improving access to untapped global markets. He emphasised expansion of youth-focused vocational training and suggested tax incentives to foster innovation, research, and digital transformation to align Pakistan's industry with global standards. Memon also called for launching microfinance schemes and credit guarantee programs to promote financial inclusion. He strongly advocated for simplifying tax systems, licensing, and business registration to restore business confidence and foster government-business cooperation. A major highlight of his proposal was the demand to revise the mandatory POS registration threshold for small businesses. He recommended increasing the limit to PKR 350,000 monthly or PKR 70 million annually, protecting small traders from undue pressure. To broaden the tax net, he advised compulsory registration of distributors, dealers, and large retailers, along with identifying non-filers through property ownership, foreign travel, and luxury expenditures such as elite school fees. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
