مضمون کا ماخذ : سلاٹ فادر
SECP, FBR, Law Ministry deny obstructing JIT probe
ISLAMABAD: Denying the allegations of obstructing probe by the joint investigation team (JIT) into Sharif family’s business dealings abroad, the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR), Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) and the Ministry of Law on Wednesday asserted that they were completely cooperating with the investigation panel. On June 12, the JIT while […]
ISLAMABAD: Denying the allegations of obstructing probe by the joint investigation team (JIT) into Sharif family’s business dealings abroad, the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR), Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) and the Ministry of Law on Wednesday asserted that they were completely cooperating with the investigation panel.
On June 12, the JIT while leveling serious allegations had submitted that some institutions were tempering with the record related to Panama case. In response, the three-judge implementation had directed additional attorney general to submit reply on June 14. But seeking one more day, the law officer will submit reply on June 15 (today).
The FBR in its reply submitted in the SC stated that the JIT requisitioned the record from the board thrice on May 8 and 25 and July 8. “JIT requisitioned record and wealth tax returns and statements on May 8 in respect of six individuals from 1985 till date. FBR provided the record within seven days from the assessment years 1984-85 till date for two individuals. Whereas, for the remaining four individuals, the record was provided from the later assessment years because they started filing returns and statements late,” the statement said. “JIT again requested for income and wealth tax record of 10 more individuals which was again provided within five days. JIT asked for record of six individuals mentioned in their earlier letter with a note that record for certain years had not been furnished by the board.
The third set of record was again submitted within three days,” the FBR said. FBR further submitted some record was not provided because it was not available with it. The reasons of unavailability of certain documents is because law did not require individuals to file these documents during certain years and certain individuals were not registered as taxpayers during certain years, the FBR stated, adding that for certain years the returns and statements were either not filed or were not available with the FBR.
FBR said that a senior commissioner was tasked to hand over the requisitioned documents to the JIT and that he remained present on every occasion before it and answered all queries. Likewise, SECP informed the court that the then chairman in July 2011 instructed the relevant officers of the Enforcement Department to initiate proceedings against Chaudhry Sugar Mills. However, during the proceedings the details sent by the company were examined and found to be satisfactory, after which the proceedings under Section 263 of the relevant ordinance were concluded.
“Attributing the closure of the investigation to the current chairman was malafide and against record. JIT requisitioned record of 45 companies on June 9 at 7 pm and the record was provided on June 12. The delay was due to weekly holidays,” it said, while rejecting the allegations of non-cooperation with the JIT. It further said that Ali Azeem was not included in initial three nominations, adding when Supreme Court registrar sought more names then SECP nominated eight names wherein Ali Azeem was included. The SECP said that indulging chairman SECP in WhatsApp call matter was also malafide. Likewise, Ministry of Law in its reply stated that JIT head dispatched the letter to it on May 18 for inquiry abroad through Interpol, adding that the ministry forwarded the letter to interior and foreign ministries for necessary steps the same day.
