Category: judiciary

The judges want to be exempted from the rigours of the Right to Information Act (“RTI”). And rightly so, because the information that one can dig up on the honourables can be quite embarrassing to them.

The author is severely critical of the Government for the failure of the Settlement Commission to achieve its desired objects. He blames bad administration, lack of transparency in the process of appointment and failure of the Government to appoint Members from the profession as the root causes of the problem. He has identified a few critical areas and makes a fervent plea for reforms.

The author laments that while the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is globally recognized as one of the best tax tribunals for its independence and competence, its reputation at home is under a cloud owing to the allegations of corruption. He makes a fervent plea that the Bench and the Bar has to play a positive role to maintain the dignity, sanctity and integrety of the Tribunal. He also outlines a few suggestions towards this end.

The author laments that the Government is losing crores of rupees due to delay in filing of tax appeals by the tax department. He makes out a fervent case for accountability

Statistics shows that, the Tax Benches of Bombay High Court, Hon’ble Justice Mr. F.I. Rebello
and Justice Mr. J.P. Devadhar and Justice F.I. Rebello and Justice R.S. Mohite in the period 21st
June, 2007 to March 2008, has disposed of 6,513 tax matters and admitted 963 matters (total
7,476) matters (Click here for details). The court working days for the period was 180 days giving average 415 matters per day has been disposed of. It may be for the first time such a large number of tax matters were disposed of. This has helped to reduce the pendency of tax matters before the Bombay High Court. At present the pendency of tax appeals is 2,600 and references is 2,100. If tax bench sits for full week to hear only the direct tax matters, the pendency of tax matters can be substantially reduced, this will help the assessee as well as the department.

The author laments that the Finance Bill 2008 made everyone happy – except the judiciary. Judiciary is guardian of our democracy. The common men have faith in the temple of justice. Only one criticism against the judiciary is that there …

Judiciary: No cheer! Read More »

The judgement of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in Mayawati vs. DCIT, and the hysterical reactions thereto by the opposition political parties, makes interesting reading. The Tribunal was faced with the question whether whopping “gifts” amounting to Rs. 12 …

Maya “Jaal” Read More »

1. The State Commission, Delhi, by its order dated 10-3-2006 in Appeal No. 1815 of 2000 held that the services rendered by the Lawyer would not come within the ambit of Section 2(1)(o) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, as …

Sue me not! Read More »

This could have come straight off a Ripleys’ believe it or not entry. Imagine – a court   room in a car! HT reported that The Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, India’s top court dealing with PF disputes from across the …

Court in a car! Read More »

There is a popular commercial by a furniture maker running on television which uses a courtroom as the setting to demonstrate the long-lasting abilities of its plywood. Two young lawyers are arguing a matter about a buffalo which apparently caused …

“adjournment culture” Read More »