FTO Directs FBR to Establish Protocols for Reactivating Blocked SIMs of Taxpayers

Federal Tax Ombudsman (FTO) has directed the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) to instruct Member-IR (Operations) to issue a standing operating procedure (SOP) for the guidance of the aggrieved taxpayers for reactivation of blocked mobile phone Sims. According to an order issued by the FTO on Monday, the Chairman of the FBR should call for an explanation from the concerned officer for not attending the hearings on the due dates. While investigating various complaints, it was observed that recently, the SIMs of 506,671 taxpayers have been blocked by FBR under section 114B of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 (the Ordinance), vide Income Tax General Order (ITGO) No. 1/2024 dated 28th April 2024 on account of Inactive Taxpayers. However, the referred ITGO does not prescribe any SOP regarding the reactivation of SIMs. It only mentions that the SIMs of these will remain blocked until ordered by the Commissioner or FBR. Similarly, while investigating Complaint No. 5785/ISB/IT/2024, the SIM of a taxpayer was blocked despite being on the Active Taxpayers’ List. Moreover, instances have been reported wherein the SIMs have not been reactivated even after the taxpayers have fulfilled the requirements for being on ATL and filed tax returns along with a surcharge for ATL. Whereas, no written SOPs are available as to how the SIMs of a taxpayer will be reactivated once he becomes an active taxpayer on the FBR portal. In view of the above, an own motion investigation was initiated on account of SIMs having been blocked by FBR for being ‘Inactive Taxpayer’ creating hardships for taxpayers. It is evident from the above section it does not prescribe any SOP regarding reactivation of SIMs nor does the ITGO dated 29.04.2024 lay down any procedure for the aggrieved person to apply for reactivation of his blocked SIM. It only mentions that the SIMs of these will remain blocked until ordered by Commissioner IR or FBR. Therefore, it is observed that no SOP has been laid down by the Board for guidance of the aggrieved taxpayers. Therefore, these inconsistencies, infirmities, and deficiencies stated above constitute maladministration in terms of section 2(3)(ii) of the FTO Ordinance, 2000, FTO order added.