{"id":5774,"date":"2019-01-29T17:24:44","date_gmt":"2019-01-29T11:54:44","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/?p=5774"},"modified":"2019-01-29T17:46:03","modified_gmt":"2019-01-29T12:16:03","slug":"do-surgical-strike-not-tax-terrorism-for-collection-of-tax","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/do-surgical-strike-not-tax-terrorism-for-collection-of-tax\/","title":{"rendered":"Do Surgical Strike, Not Tax Terrorism, For Collection Of Tax"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-content\/uploads\/Prathana-Jalan.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"108\" height=\"100\" class=\"alignleft size-full wp-image-5354\" srcset=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-content\/uploads\/Prathana-Jalan.jpg 108w, https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-content\/uploads\/Prathana-Jalan-100x93.jpg 100w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 108px) 100vw, 108px\" \/><\/p>\n<p><strong>CA Prarthana Jalan has taken umbrage at the fact that the income-tax department is, in defiance of the law, resorting to &#8220;<em>tax terrorism<\/em>&#8221; of innocent taxpayers over frivolous issues with a view to increase collection and meet their own targets. She has pleaded that the department should focus its energies on the big tax evaders and do &#8220;<em>surgical strike<\/em>&#8221; upon them rather than harassing innocent taxpayers<\/strong>  <\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><strong><u>DO SURGICAL STRIKE  , NOT TAX TERRORISM FOR COLLECTION OF TAX<\/u><\/strong>\n  <\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">CBDT-  HOWZ THE TAX COLLECTION?\n  <\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">Income Tax Officers- high\n  <\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">CBDT-  HOWZ THE TAX COLLECTION?\n  <\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">Income Tax Officers- HIGH\n  <\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">CBDT  -HOWZ THE TAX COLLECTION?\n  <\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">Income Tax Officers- <strong>HIGH<\/strong><strong> <\/strong>\n  <\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><strong>CBDT-  I WANT TO HEAR HIGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><!--more--><\/p>\n<p>Well, as we are marching towards March,  i.e end of financial year, Income tax departmentby any means <strong>even by ignoring the provisions of law , judiciary  pronouncementsand fostering tax terrorism <\/strong>,they just want to win over their  target of &ldquo;<strong>Rs. 11,50,000 CRORE- TAX COLLECTION &rdquo;.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Whereas, Honble  Bombay High Court in a land mark judgement on 27th March 2018, in the case of <a href=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/the-shri-saibaba-sansthan-trust-shirdi-vs-uoi-bombay-high-court-tax-recovery-cbdt-should-investigate-arm-twisting-measures-dehors-application-of-the-law-adopted-by-the-revenue-for-recovery-of-tax-a\/\">Shri  SaibabaSansthan Trust (Shirdi) vs. UOI<\/a> had stated<strong><em>&ldquo;Whereas CBDT should investigate arm twisting  measures, dehors application of the law, adopted by the Revenue for recovery of  tax and take corrective measures to ensure AOs are not overzealous in  recovering maximum revenue before 31st March&rdquo;<\/em><\/strong>\n    <\/p>\n<p><strong>Ironically, on 4th  January,2019, <a href=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/info\/cbdt-chief-announces-eight-strategies-to-enhance-recovery-of-taxes\/\">CBDT&rsquo;S Chairman <\/strong>has instructed the  department officials<\/a> <strong>to maximize tax collections in general and  collections under Regular Assessment in particular, the following strategies  need to be implemented in this quarter <\/strong>in order to surpass the target of budget estimate of Rs 11,50,000 crore  collection:- \n    <\/p>\n<p><em>&ldquo;<\/em><em>(a)  Targeted recovery surveys in potential cases where high amount of recovery is  likely.<\/em>\n  <\/p>\n<p><em>(b) Sale of attached  properties in appropriate cases by TROs to recover confirmed demand where  normal measures of recovery have not yielded results.<\/em>\n  <\/p>\n<p><em>(c) Initiation of  proceedings under section 179 of the Act in eligible cases to make recoveries  of outstanding dues of the companies.<\/em>\n  <\/p>\n<p><em>(d) Filing of prosecution  under section 276C (2) against persons who are willfully evading payment of  outstanding taxes.<\/em>\n  <\/p>\n<p><em>(e) Completion of  non-time-barring assessments in cases where demand is likely to be raised and  collected during the current financial year itself.<\/em>\n  <\/p>\n<p><em>(f) Verification of  deductors where there is non-payment of TDS to the Government account though  TDS has been deducted as well as where there is substantially low TDS as  compared to last year including launching of prosecution in cases of  substantial default.<\/em>\n  <\/p>\n<p><em>(g) Verification of payment  of advance tax by the seller of properties in cases where TDS under section  1941A has been made by the buyer.<\/em>\n  <\/p>\n<p><em>(h) Monitoring of payment  of Dividend Distribution Tax by obtaining information from financial websites,  SERI, etc.<\/em>\n  <\/p>\n<p><em>3.  Other strategies depending upon the specific characteristics of the region  should also be adopted so as to increase collections and ultimately achieve the  budget target&rdquo;<\/em><\/p>\n<p>It has been instructed to foster  efforts to collect regular assessment demands of current year as well as past  years. Whereas if demand is under dispute and is subject to the appellate  proceedings, then, the statutory right of appeal vested in the assesseeshould  not be rendered illusory and nugatory. This right gets defeated when assesse is  pressurised to pay the demand in dispute.\n  <\/p>\n<p>Further, the aforesaid instructions  have been issued without considering the fact that this was the first year of  E-assessments (Though E-assessments in true spirit are yet to take place). <strong>A Lot of High Pitched ironically &ldquo;Best&nbsp; Assessments (u\/s144)&rdquo;as they are called have  been done especially in cases of AIR\/Cash deposits\/NMS etc.<\/strong><strong>As per Instruction No. 96 of 1969, 100%  stay of demand has to be granted in high pitched assessments<\/strong>and even  otherwise such hefty demands have been raised that it is next to impossible for assessees to pay  even&nbsp; 20% demand. \n  <\/p>\n<p>The aforesaid instruction has been upheld by <strong>Hon&rsquo;ble Karnataka High Court in the case of  Flipkart India Private Limited vs. ACIT<\/strong>:-\n  <\/p>\n<p><strong><em>&ldquo;CBDT  Circular dated 29.2.2016 does not supersede Instruction No.1914 but modifies  it. Both have to be read together. The AO and CIT cannot straightaway demand  payment of 15% of the dues but have to grant complete stay if the assessment is  &ldquo;unreasonably high pitched&rdquo; or the demand for depositing 15% of the disputed  demand leads to &quot;genuine hardship&quot; to the assessee&rdquo;<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>But  abiding by the command of CBDT,tax officers have in the present month of January  itself, <strong>have not only issued notices u\/s  221(1) for tax collection against the time barring assessments done in  December,2018 but in some cases even bank attachments have also been done.<\/strong>\n<\/p>\n<p>Whereas  recently on 11th Sep,2018,Hon&rsquo;ble Bombay High Court in the case ofBhupendraMurji  Shah vs. DCIT had stated<br \/>\n  <strong><em>&ldquo;The  AO is not justified in insisting on payment of 20% of the demand based on  CBDT&#8217;s instruction dated 29.02.2016 during pendency of appeal before the  CIT(A). This approach may defeat &amp; frustrate the right of the assessee to  seek protection against collection and recovery pending appeal. Such can never  be the mandate of law.&rdquo;<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>There are  plethora of judgements which have clearly stated that coercive measures should  not be adopted by the department in collecting demands especially in cases  where appeals are pending for adjudication. In some cases severe strictures  have also been passed against officers for resorting to coercive collection  methods yet the aforesaid instructions have been issued to the officers.<\/p>\n<p>In order to meet the target, a lot of meetings,  surveys\/searches would be conducted by the department in the present quarter .<\/p>\n<p>\n  Prosecution notices for non payment  of advance tax, return filing, TDS delay, non payment of wrong demands (without  disposing of 154\/ giving tax effect pending since long time) have become a  common trend now. The difference between civil offence and criminal offence has  been blurred. What should be the last resort to be taken by the department and  in case of severe, intentional, deliberate, contumacious conduct is eventually  becoming the first resort they are taking i.e to prosecute.<\/p>\n<p>No  doubt for development and smooth running of the country, high tax collection is  utmost important and a blessing and every citizen should timely and correctly  pay the tax on his income. Tax Evaders should be identified and penalised and  even prosecuted as per the magnitude of offences but surprisingly instead of  doing surgical strike on real and big tax evaders by using the drones of high  data filtration and intelligence properly, Income Tax Department is using its  artillery of Penalty, Prosecution, Benami law, Searches,Surveys etc even on  common law abiding tax paying citizens at large, fostering an environment of Tax  Terrorism. Whereas it is desirable that instead of using Tax terrorism at large,Surgical  strikes on big and real tax evaders should be done. \n  <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>CA Prarthana Jalan has taken umbrage at the fact that the income-tax department is, in defiance of the law, resorting to &#8220;<em>tax terrorism<\/em>&#8221; of innocent taxpayers over frivolous issues with a view to increase collection and meet their own targets. She has pleaded that the department should focus its energies on the big tax evaders and do &#8220;<em>surgical strike<\/em>&#8221; upon them rather than harassing innocent taxpayers<\/p>\n<div class=\"read-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/do-surgical-strike-not-tax-terrorism-for-collection-of-tax\/\">Read more &#8250;<\/a><\/div>\n<p><!-- end of .read-more --><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5774","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-articles"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5774","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5774"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5774\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5774"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5774"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5774"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}