A senior most official of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) Department of Inland Revenue, who had pinpointed losses to national exchequer to the tune of at least Rs 8 billion, is being made to pay a high price for the whistle blowing, it has been learnt.
Ishtiaq Ahmed, presently serving as Commissioner (Appeals) in BS-19, had submitted a comprehensive report to the Federal Secretary, Kashmir Affairs, in September 2013, highlighting gross irregularities in the issuance of tax refunds worth billions of rupees to the foreign companies engaged by WAPDA for Mangla raising project and Neelum-Jhelum Hydro-Power Project.
The Department of Inland Revenue (IR) falls under the administrative control of the AJK Council, which is headed by the Prime Minister of Pakistan as chairman, and has its secretariat in Islamabad.
Federal Minister and Federal Secretary, Kashmir Affairs, happen to be its in-charge minister and administrative secretary, respectively.
In his report, Mr Ahmed had identified the alleged irregularities involving receipt of cash in Excise Offices on account of motor taxes, registration and transfer of ownership fees of motor vehicles leading to overcharging or non-deposit of the same in the national kitty.
Regarding tax refunds to the foreign companies, he had pointed out that since the foreign investors were undertaking only the high-return projects due to the security concerns in the country, they could not suffer business losses.
Similarly, he had also cited lack of proper assessment of domestic companies as well as favouritism in award of performance-related cash rewards, misuse of official vehicles and ministerial staff.
However, the report did not go well with the AJK Council, triggering off a series of vindictive actions against him, notwithstanding his unblemished service record.
Interestingly, the Council assigned its own officer for an inquiry into his report and not to the firms of chartered accountants as permitted by income and sales tax laws.
Prior to that, on January 15, 2014, an FIR was lodged against Mr Ahmed by his ex-wife (divorced in 2009), alleging that he had sold her vehicle fraudulently in March 2008.
Mr Ahmed contended in the High Court that the FIR had been lodged with the connivance of some officers of his department, almost six years after the sale of the disputed vehicle and five years after he had divorced the complainant.
He also brought two cases of unusual favour given by the department to the siblings of his former wife besides referring to his report, following which the HC suspended the FIR on January 30, 2014.
However, the Council placed Mr Ahmed under suspension on the basis of the in-operative FIR from February 2, 2014, the day he completed his senior management course from Karachi.
A Sessions Court where Mr Ahmed had applied for bail-before-arrest noted discrepancy in the complainant’s version and held on March 24 that prima facie the allegations against him were untrue.
However, two days after the said judgment, the Council set up its own “Fact Finding Committee” to probe the matter that was beyond its mandate.
The Committee did not hear Mr Ahmed and recommended action against him under the E&D Rules, 1973, on the grounds that he had “used his position for transfer of vehicle’s ownership.”
Interestingly, the ownership was transferred on September 17, 2008 when Mr Ahmed was in Netherland to pursue a professional course.
On being challenged, the AJK High Court set aside the notification of his suspension on May 22, 2014. However, in order to circumvent the HC order, the Council maintained that he had been suspended vide another notification issued “some 20 days ago on May 2, 2014.”
The second notification was also suspended by the HC on May 30, followed by an interim order on August 15 whereby the case was held in abeyance due to a sub judice review petition in AJK Supreme Court on the competence of Secretary, Kashmir Affairs to sack BS-19 officers.
The Council filed a Petition for Leave to Appeal (PLA) in the AJK Supreme Court against HC interim order, alleging that “Mr Ahmed was involved in a serious crime and was causing loss of revenue by passing vindictive orders as Commissioner (Appeals).”
As corruption charges were also levelled against him during verbal arguments, the Supreme Court held that the competent authority (PM Pakistan) could proceed against him under the law.
Based on the apex court order, the Council sought approval from the PM for disciplinary action against Mr Ahmed. The approval was granted, but with a condition that inquiry officer should not belong to the Council or the Ministry of Kashmir Affairs.
On April 15, this year, the FIR against Mr Ahmed was also quashed by the senior civil judge, Muzaffarabad.
Sources in AJK bureaucracy claimed that a group of corrupt officials in the Council, fearful of Mr Ahmed’s integrity, was bent upon thwarting his elevation as head of the department.
And there was credible evidence in support of their assertion.
In January 2012, the Council had issued a provisional seniority list of the IR officers, whereby Mr Ahmed was placed beneath Mirza Zulfiqar, in spite of the fact that the latter had worked under his direct subordination in 2007-08.
In August 2012, Mr Zulfiqar was given the charge of head of the department while in June 2014, a month before his retirement, the Council inducted Mohammad Waseem Altaf, an FBR official of BS-19, in the Department of IR on deputation as head of the department.
Interestingly, Mr Altaf is one of those officers who were ignored for promotioin in BS-20, reportedly because the PM office did not receive a positive report about their integrity. They have challenged that decision in the Lahore High Court. However, here in AJK he is holding the charge of both BS-20 posts of Commissioner IR and Commissioner Provincial Taxes, in contravention of the relevant rules.
When contacted by this scribe on telephone, Federal Secretary Shahidullah Baig said an inquiry into the matter was under process.
“The Prime Minister has sought a panel of three officers from outside the Ministry of Kashmir affairs and the Council. The panel has been sent via Establishment Division,” he said.
To another question, he denied outright that the Council had anything to do with the family dispute of the official.
“In fact its because of transfer of a vehicle. Papers have been sent to the PM office after consultation with the Law Division,” he said.
When asked if Mr Ahmed was a dishonest officer, he said he could not give any statement about it before inquiry.
When asked why the report by Mr Ahmed on alleged lapses in assessment and refund of taxes was not verified through external experts, he counter questioned: “Do you think all those sitting in the Council are dishonest?”
He then went on to claim that ever since his posting, he had saved Rs 330 million in the non-development budget.
Mr Baig refused to take up more questions, saying he was in the middle of a meeting.
It may be mentioned here that the AJK Council has mostly remained at the centre of allegations of embezzlement of the AJK taxpayers’ money through shady contacts.
In one such case in January 2010, full advance payment of Rs 109 million was made by the Council to an obscure company, allegedly owned by the kin of the then federal secretary Kashmir affairs, for computerisation of the Department of IR, which has not been done to this day.
In June 2012, when the then Accountant General Tahir Mahmud Butt pointed out this and some other serious violations of codal formalities and applications of pre-audit checks in the multi-million deals of Council, arrest warrants of two officials were issued by the then AJK Ehtesab Bureau chairman Justice Hussain Mazhar Kaleem.
However, the Bureau was stopped from taking any action on those cases amid removal of Mr Kaleem from its chairmanship.
When Mr Baig was asked that why the culprits involved in automation scam were not punished, he claimed that an inquiry into this matter was also under process..... Tariq Naqash
