ABDUL SHAKOOR, JUSTICE:---

Through the instant petition, the petitioner has invoked the extra-ordinary Constitutional Jurisdiction of this Court for declaring the order dated 27.01.2020 of Federal Tax Ombudsman "FTO" and judgment and order dated 07.10.2020 of the Hon'ble President of Pakistan "Appellate Authority" to be illegal, without jurisdiction and of no legal effect.

2. Succinctly narrated facts are that respondent No.01 filed Income Tax Returns for the years, 2014 to 2018 in the respective financial years and thereafter, sought refunds of Tax deducted on raw material under section 148 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 "the Ordinance" by filing applications. The applications, however, could not be entertained for the reasons that the petitioner-department had filed references before this Court with the questions of law whether under the facts and circumstances, the taxpayer- respondent No.01 falls under the definition of "manufacturer" or "commercial importer", which were pending adjudication when the later approached the FTO by filing complaints on 20 12.2019 for issuance of refund as well as compensation under section 171 of the Ordinance.

3. The petitioner contested the complaints and claimed before the FTO that petitioner-firm is simply involved in packing of imported tea and spices in retail packing through human resources, which cannot be termed as manufacturing process.

4. After hearing the parties, the learned FTO disposed of the complaints with recommendations dated 27.01.2020 to FBR; "direct the Commissioner IR, Peshawar Zone to complete the verification process and dispose of complainant's refund applications for the Tax Years 2014, 2016 to 2018 after providing him opportunity of hearing as per law and report compliance within 45 days”. As against that, the petitioner filed representation under section 14 of the Federal Ombudsman Institutional Reforms Act, 2013 read with section 32 of the FTO Ordinance, 2000 before the Appellate Authority; but, the same was rejected by way of impugned judgment and order dated 07.10.2020; hence, the instant writ petition.

5. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the respondent-company provided a copy of consolidated judgment of this Court dated 07.11.2022 rendered in Tax References Nos. 16, 10, 11 and 12-P of 2019 whereby all the references have been answered in negative by holding that the issue of declaring the respondent-company as "manufacturer" has already been adjudicated upon and decided in its favour. Even otherwise, the impugned recommendation of the FTO followed by order of the Appellate Authority qua disposal of refund applications of the respondents within 60 days in terms of Section 170(4) of the Ordinance are not suffering from any illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional error which could be interfered with by this Court under its Constitutional Jurisdiction. Hence, the instant writ petition stands dismissed being meritless.

Petition dismissed.