Allowing the petition the Court held that , The CBDT is empowered to lay down broad guidelines for disposal of appeals by CIT(A). However, it cannot offer ‘incentives’ to CITT(A) for making enhancement and levying penalty. Such policy transgresses the exercise of quasi-judicial powers & is wholly impermissible and invalid u/s 119. The ‘Incentives’ have the propensity to influence the CIT ( A) and they will be tempted to pass an order in a particular manner so as to achieve a greater target of disposal. Portion of Central Action Plan prepared by CBDT which gives higher weightage for disposal of appeals by quality orders i.e where order passed by Commissioner(Appeals) is in favour of revenue was to be set aside .(WP No. 3343 of 2018, dt.11.04.2019)
Chamber of Tax Consultants v. CBDT ( 2019)416 ITR 21/ 263 Taxman 551 / 177 DTR 284/ 308 CTR 464 (Bom)(HC), www.itatonline.org/Ace Legal v .UOI ( 2019) 416 ITR 21/ 308 CTR 464/ 177 DTR 284 ( Bom) (HC)
S. 250 : Appeal – Commissioner (Appeals) – Guidelines for disposal of appeals – Incentive to CIT(A) –Target of disposal – Enhancement and penalty – Impermissible and invalid- Portion of Central Action Plan prepared by CBDT which gives higher weightage for disposal of appeals by quality orders i.e where order passed by Commissioner(Appeals) is in favour of revenue was to be set aside.[ S.119 , 250 (6A]