PCIT v. Grasim Industries Ltd. (2018) 256 Taxman 79 (Bom)(HC)

S.260A: Appeal –High Court – Representation by departmental advocates -Court observed that it is appropriate to suggest to CBDT to consider holding of a training programme, where leading advocates could address domain-expert on ethics, obligation and standard expected of advocates before they start representing State, as it would ensure that revenue is properly represented to serve greater cause of justice and fair play –It is primary duty of Assessing Officer to upgrade Counsel with regard to all facts involved in matter, more particularly facts which may have transpired after passing of impugned order of Tribunal so as to avoid unnecessary delays in disposing of cases pending before Court. The ASG and the Registry is directed to forward a copy of this order to the Chairman, CBDT. The ASG is expected to interact and advice the CBDT in respect of the issues referred to herein above to enable proper representation by the advocates on behalf of the revenue- Matter remanded . [ S.119 ]

Court observed that advocates representing revenue must be utmost careful whilst making statement on instructions, as same are accepted by Court, without question. On other hand, it is primary duty of Assessing Officer to upgrade Counsel with regard to all facts involved in matter, more particularly facts which may have transpired after passing of impugned order of Tribunal so as to avoid unnecessary delays in disposing of cases pending before Court .It is job of Assessing Officer to inform advocate appearing for revenue of all facts, so as to ensure that justice is done and, thus, officers of revenue cannot believe that once matter is in Court, it is sole responsibility of counsel it is appropriate to suggest to CBDT to consider holding of a training programme, where leading advocates could address domain-expert on ethics, obligation and standard expected of advocates before they start representing State as it would ensure that revenue is properly represented to serve greater cause of justice and fair play for revenue to protect the interest of State and their responsibility comes to end. It is appropriate to suggest to CBDT to consider holding of a training programme, where leading advocates could address domain-expert on ethics, obligation and standard expected of advocates before they start representing State as it would ensure that revenue is properly represented to serve greater cause of justice and fair play. In any case, the CBDT is expected to lay down a standard procedure in respect of manner in which the Departmental Officer/Assessing Officer assist the counsel for the revenue while promoting/protecting revenue’scause. In most cases, at least during the final hearing, revenue’s counsel are left to fend for themselves and that even papers at times are borrowed from the other side or taken from the Court Records. If the mindset of the Revenue Officer changes and they attend to the case diligently till it is disposed of, only then would it be ensured that the State is properly represented.  The ASG and the Registry is directed to forward a copy of this order to the Chairman, CBDT. The ASG is expected to interact and advice the CBDT in respect of the issues referred to herein above to enable proper representation by the advocates on behalf of the revenue.  Matter remanded . ( AY.2001-02)