FBR notices on PanamaLeaks mostly ignored

ISLAMABAD: The vast majority of those, including the prime minister’s three children, named in Panama Papers have not yet responded to the FBR’s notices issued early this month.

Among important political figures Aleem Khan of the PTI is the only person who has responded to the notice and admitted that he owns an offshore company.  Aleem Khan told the FBR that his offshore company has also been reflected in his wealth tax statements already submitted to the Board.

The FBR has referred Aleem Khan’s case to the Lahore tax authorities for further probe. Otherwise, the FBR got a cold response from a vast majority of those issued notices.  Informed sources said out of around 400 notices served early this month, so far almost 55 persons have responded. 

Out of these 55, nearly 30 persons sought adjournments whereas some contented that the offshore companies named under their name were old and no more valid. Following political pressures and after a lapse of almost five months, the FBR had issued notices to around 400 owners of offshore companies whose names appeared in the Panama Papers.

Those issued notices included the three children of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif — Husain Nawaz, Hasan Nawaz and Maryam Nawaz.  The FBR sources said none of the three had yet given any response.

According to media reports the notices were issued under sections of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 dealing with verification of the information with the FBR database. The FBR wanted to hear the viewpoint of the owners of offshore companies as reported by the documents released by the ICIJ.

The FBR had asked the persons concerned to explain whether they were the owners of offshore accounts and other related information. The notices were issued by the Directorate General of Intelligence and Investigation to obtain official versions of the people under media scrutiny.

According to the FBR, this exercise will help verify the authenticity of reports that have been surfacing in the media for the past five months. It is said under Section 216 of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001, the income tax commissioner may, by notice in writing, require any person, whether or not liable for tax under the ordinance to furnish to the commissioner or an authorised officer, any information relevant to any tax leviable under this Ordinance as specified in the notice; or attend at the time and place designated in the notice for the purpose of being examined on oath by the commissioner or an authorised officer concerning the tax affairs of that person or any other person and, for that purpose, the commissioner or authorised officer may require the person examined to produce any accounts, documents, or computer-stored information in the control of the person.