Brac to pay Tk404 crore in taxes

A five-member bench of the Supreme Court Appellate Division led by Chief Justice Surendra Kumar Sinha yesterday scrapped a previous High Court decision which had exempted the NGO from paying taxes on the grounds that it is a charitable organisation. The court heard arguments on 11 separate government appeals filed against a 2014 High Court order to deliver the verdict, Deputy Attorney General Sardar Md Rashed Jahangir told reporters. The authorities issued a total of 11 notices to the NGO seeking the amount due. According to the case, the deputy commissioner of taxes fixed the income tax for the Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee (Brac) for 11 tax years – 1993-94, 1994-95, 1995-96, 1996-97, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12. Brac later challenged the directives with the appellate commissioner. As the appellate commissioner upheld the deputy commissioner’s decision, Brac moved the Taxes Appellate Tribunal. When Brac did not get a decision in its favour, it moved the High Court with separate income tax references. On December 14, 2014, the High Court in its verdict said that the income tax was eligible for exemption. The commissioner of taxes then moved the Appellate Division against the High Court order with 11 leave-to-appeal pleas which were accepted by the court in September last year. The top court has asked the NGO to pay half of the amount within a year in four equal instalments. The appeal was then forwarded to the regular bench of the Appellate Division and was heard yesterday. Brac counsel Md Asaduzzaman told reporters that they had already paid a portion of the income tax. “Brac may file a review petition after getting the full text of the verdict.” In a press statement issued last night Brac said it is a non-profit organisation and the income generated by Brac’s social enterprises supports its social development programmes. “Our social development programmes across the country and the millions of people who benefit from them will not be adversely affected by the outcome of this ruling,” the statement added.