ISLAMABAD, Dec 21: The Federal Tax Ombudsman (FTO), Justice (Retd) Saleem Akhtar has asked the Central Board of Revenue (CBR) to initiate an inquiry against the tax officials who raided factory of a complainant and sealed godowns.

The Ombudsman asked the CBR to appoint director general (DG) inquiries to hold an inquiry into the allegations of coercion, intimidation, sealing of godowns, said an official announcement issued on Saturday.

The FTO observed that in case the allegation were proved against the officers responsible for misconduct appropriate action be taken against them.

The FTO further directed the relevant tax authority to decide the case instituted against the complainant on merit but after the completion of inquiry by DG inquiry.

He said that the complainant be given full opportunity of hearing before the adjudicating officer and compliance report should be produced to his office within 30 days of this order.

The complainant, Dawood Textile Printing Industries, (Pvt) Ltd, alleged that the functionaries of the sales tax department equipped with weapons, raided their factory on March 27, 2002 on the basis of a notice under section 38 of the sales tax act. They sealed the factory and remained there for six hours, said the complainant.

The complainant further said that the tax officials forcibly obtained signature of the chief executive of the factory on a false stock statement prepared by the officials of the department.

The Ombudsman observed that it was unbelievable that after raiding the complainants premises the staff members would not have made any physical check and would be satisfied on the statement of the chief executive.

He said that if the respondents did not count and measure the stock reliance can not be placed entirely on the signed statement, which has been challenged on valid grounds and has made it a disputed document.

This proved that the tax officials did not have any work sheet or lot wise measurement/ counting details for such a huge stock otherwise it would have been produced.

It seemed that the complainant had a visual look and without any checking estimated the stock and prepared the report on which chief executive’s signature was obtained.

From this circumstance, the FTO observed that it was clear that counting and measurement was not carried out and the possibility of obtaining the signature of the chief executive and his chief accountant against their will could not be ruled out.