Latest news with #ADRCs
Business Recorder
6 days ago
- Business
- Business Recorder
Revamping mode of ADRC appointments: FBR seeks input from stakeholders
ISLAMABAD: The Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) is seeking input from different stakeholders to revamp the mode and manner of appointing Members of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Committee. Director General (Law) of FBR Dr Ishtiaq told Business Recorder; 'We are seeking input from different stakeholders and after consultation will prepare the report. Hopefully it will make the ADRC more transparent and credible.' A two-member bench, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi, on 3rd July while hearing the Zarai Taraqiati Bank Ltd's petition had directed the FBR to submit report on ADRC on 24-07-25. FBR refuses to share info about ADRCs cases Dr Ishtiaq had told the Court that the FBR is open to any constructive suggestions regarding ADRC proceedings, as mandated under the law. CJP Yahya, therefore, allowed the FBR to consult with the stakeholders. Advocate Hafiz Ahsaan Ahmad Khokhar, constitutional and tax law expert, said the need for an effective and structured Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) system, particularly in tax matters, has become critical. He maintained that the conventional litigation model has not only overwhelmed the judiciary but has also severely impaired the state's ability to realise tax revenues in a timely manner. Thousands of tax cases involving hundreds of billions of rupees are languishing before appellate tribunals, High Courts, and the Supreme Court, creating uncertainty for businesses, discouraging investment, and delaying revenue recovery. A credible ADR system is now essential for easing this burden, restoring taxpayer confidence, and ensuring fiscal efficiency. He observed that despite having enabling statutory provisions for ADR under Section 134A of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001; Section 47A of the Sales Tax Act, 1990; Section 38 of the Federal Excise Act, 2005; and Section 195C of the Customs Act, 1969, Pakistan has yet to operationalize ADR in a meaningful way. The reasons for this failure are well-known: lack of transparency in constituting ADR Committees, inclusion of serving tax officers on panels, absence of qualified and neutral arbitrators, lack of digital infrastructure, and the non-binding nature of ADR outcomes—especially in factual disputes. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Express Tribune
15-07-2025
- Business
- Express Tribune
Top court stays ADRC proceedings
The Supreme Court has ordered a stay on proceedings in all cases currently pending before the Alternative Dispute Resolution Committees (ADRCs), which function under the administrative control of the FBR to handle tax-related matters, especially those involving state entities. The order came from a division bench headed by Chief Justice Yahya Afridi, which issued a two-page directive. It noted that during proceedings, it was brought to the court's attention that the FBR, in consultation with the Ministry of Law and Justice, was in the process of overhauling the mechanism for appointing members to the ADRCs. The FBR's legal member submitted before the bench that the revenue body remains open to constructive suggestions regarding the ADRC proceedings as mandated by law. Taking note, the court observed it would be appropriate for the FBR to first examine the matter in detail. Accordingly, the bench directed the FBR to consult with Shahid Jamil, counsel for the petitioner (ZTBL), counsel for the respondent (FBR), amicus curiae Sultan Mazhar Sher Khan, the Attorney General for Pakistan and the Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice. The order further directed that the FBR must "duly consider the opinions and input" of these stakeholders before finalising the proposed framework for appointing ADRC members. "A report in this regard shall be submitted before this Court prior to the next date of hearing. In the meantime, proceedings in all cases currently pending before the ADRC shall remain stayed till 24.07.2025," the court stated. Shahid Jamil, counsel for ZTBL, maintained that transparency must be ensured in the appointment of ADRC members. However, legal experts remain divided on the current state of ADRCs and their role in dispute resolution. One lawyer representing a state-owned enterprise (SOE) argued that the ADRC mechanism has proven "destructive" for SOEs. "They are being crushed with taxation and have no remedy against the ADRC," he said, alleging that billions of rupees in taxes were forcibly recovered in June without the legally required notices, simply to meet revenue targets. "All profit-making SOEs are being destroyed," he added. Another lawyer contended that the ADRC should function independently and without FBR's influence to be credible. On the other hand, Hafiz Ehsaan Ahmad, who has represented the FBR in numerous cases, defended the institution. He explained that the FBR was legally empowered to constitute ADR committees for the settlement of tax disputes and to avoid prolonged litigation. However, he acknowledged that the ADR system in Pakistan has struggled due to several structural flaws, including the absence of qualified and independent arbitrators, a lack of transparency in ADRC composition, inadequate digital and institutional infrastructure and, most crucially, the limited binding nature and enforceability of ADR outcomes, particularly when they involve findings of fact.
Business Recorder
14-07-2025
- Business
- Business Recorder
FBR refuses to share info about ADRCs cases
ISLAMABAD: The Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) has persistently refused to share information about cases decided by the Alternative Dispute Resolution Committees (ADRCs) and matter is still pending before the Pakistan Information Commission (PIC). The Pakistan Information Commission will now evaluate the legitimacy and scope of FBR's secrecy claim under section 216 (Disclosure of information by a public servant) of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 whether public interest outweighs institutional confidentiality. According to a tax expert, despite the lapse of considerable time and extensive legal scrutiny, critical information relating to a multi-billion-rupee loss to the national exchequer, allegedly caused through misinterpretation of tax laws by the Alternative Dispute Resolution Committees (ADRCs) of the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR), remains veiled in secrecy and is currently pending before the Pakistan Information Commission (PIC). 'Pakistan needs integrated dry port strategy to decentralise economic activity' When contacted, tax expert said that controversy centres on claims that the ADRCs, operating under the administrative umbrella of FBR, extended inadmissible tax benefits to select taxpayers by wrongly applying tax provisions, resulting in a substantial financial blow to the state. However, efforts by tax lawyer Waheed Shahzad Butt to bring the full details into the public domain continue to face institutional resistance. Waheed Butt informed that matter has already been deliberated before the Federal Tax Ombudsman, the President of Pakistan, and both Single and Division Benches of the Lahore High Court. Despite these multiple rounds of judicial and quasi-judicial engagement, the core information sought by whistleblowers and public interest petitioners remains withheld. At the heart of FBR's defence lies its invocation of Section 216 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, which the tax authority contends protects such data as 'secret and confidential,' thereby exempting it from public disclosure, even when broader national accountability is at stake: Waheed added. The Pakistan Information Commission is now tasked with evaluating the legitimacy and scope of FBR's secrecy claim under Section 216, and whether public interest outweighs institutional confidentiality. Shielding questionable ADRC decisions behind a legal cloak contradicts the principles of transparency and fiscal justice. As the matter awaits final adjudication by PIC, eyes remain fixed on whether the truth behind the alleged revenue compromise will finally come to light or remain buried under procedural secrecy. Earlier FBR has refused to disclose information related to orders passed by the ADRC raises serious questions about transparency and accountability in tax machinery. Order has been passed by the FBR on the basis of directions issued by LHC to provide orders passed by the FBR on the recommendations of the ADRCs to the applicant Advocate Waheed Shahzad Butt through the process provided under Right of Access to Information Act, 2017. Interestingly, the FBR has also invoked the exclusion clause of the Right of Access to Information Act 2017, which allows certain information to be withheld from the public. The refusal to provide information has sparked concerns among tax experts and lawyers, who argue that the ADRC orders have a significant impact on taxpayers and the economy as a whole, Waheed Butt added. Access to information is a sine qua non of constitutional democracy. The public has a right to know how public functionaries do their job. The responsibility of public functionaries to disclose what they do and how they do works against both corruption and highhandedness, Waheed added. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
