The Federal Tax Ombudsman (FTO) serves as a crucial watchdog overseeing government tax authorities to prevent maladministration and ensure fairness in dealings with the general public. Established under the Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance 2000, the FTO plays a pivotal role in addressing grievances related to tax matters in Pakistan. Understanding its working process is crucial to appreciating its role in resolving tax-related grievances. This article examines the intricate process by which complaints are addressed at the FTO, highlighting its commitment to justice and accountability.

STEP 1: FILING OF COMPLAINT

The process to address any grievance begins at FTO by the filing of a complaint by any aggrieved taxpayer, or when FTO takes a matter on its own motion, or in case of reference. The complaint filed by the aggrieved persons may be handwritten or online through the FTO website, email, or WhatsApp.

STEP 2: ASSIGNMENT OF COMPLAINT

After a complaint is lodged, the Federal Tax Ombudsman (FTO) Registrar's office assigns it to the Advisor and the regional office of the relevant jurisdiction. Different advisors, such as Advisor Income Tax, Advisor Sales Tax, and Advisor Customs, are appointed for various tax matters at regional offices and headquarters to adjudicate on concerned complaint matters. Territorial jurisdiction is determined by the complainant's tax office, but in exceptional cases, convenience to the complainant's (or his AR's) residence, or dissatisfaction with the assigned advisor, may lead to a change in the assigned regional office.

STEP 3: SEEKING COMMENTS FROM FBR

After a complaint is assigned, the assigned advisor at the Federal Tax Ombudsman's office requests comments from the relevant department or officer at the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR). These comments are crucial, as they provide insights and responses to the allegations made in the complaint.  A copy of the comments, often in the form of objections, is shared with the complainant as well. This process ensures that all relevant parties have the opportunity to provide input and address any concerns raised during the complaint investigation.

STEP 4: HEARING FIXED AND HELD

After receiving the comments from the concerned department of FBR, a hearing is scheduled, and hearing notices are issued to both parties involved. During the hearing, either the complainant's Authorized Representative (AR) or the complainant himself presents his arguments. Simultaneously, a Departmental Representative (DR) from the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) attends the hearing, allowing both parties to present their submissions effectively. In certain exceptional circumstances, where it is not convenient for the complainant to attend in person at the assigned office, the hearing may be held online by the FTO office.

STEP 5: ORDER AND ITS APPRAISAL

After the hearing, the assigned advisor drafts the order, which is then transmitted onwards for assessment by the Special Appraisal Advisor. This crucial appraisal stage involves a meticulous review by a designated advisor to ensure the order's accuracy and fairness and that it's coherent, compliant with the law, and aligned with principles of justice. Orders originating from regional offices are also directed to headquarters for this essential appraisal step.

STEP 6: FINAL APPROVAL BY CHAIRMAN FTO

After the appraisal stage, the order is submitted to the Federal Tax Ombudsperson himself for final review and signing. The FTO, for one last time, thoroughly examines the order to ensure it is satisfactory and well-versed before signing it. This process ensures that the order adheres to the law and is coherent in its content and application. 

STEP 7: PUBLICATION OF ORDER

Upon the signing of the order, it gets sent to the Registrar FTO, which promptly uploads it to the FTO website on the very same day and also gets disseminated to all the parties concerned. This ensures immediate accessibility to all relevant parties. This practice of swift publication on the website guarantees transparency and accountability, allowing for thorough scrutiny of every decision made, thereby enhancing trust in the system.