Pursuant to the severe strictures passed by the Courts in CIT vs. Sairang Developers (Bom High Court) and ITO vs. Growel Energy Co. Ltd (ITAT Mumbai) regarding the mindless manner in which appeals are filed by the department, without regard to the harassment caused to the taxpayers, the CBDT has issued an Office Memorandum dated 17.07.2014 by which a Committee to study the appellate orders to examine the filing of appeals by the department has been set up. The Committee comprises of six high-level officers and they have been given clear and detailed terms of reference. The object of the Committee is to appraise the efficacy of existing dispute resolution forums of CsIT (A) & ITAT and to suggest steps to reduce litigation before these forums. The Committee is expected to submit its report within 8 weeks from the date of its constitution.
CBDT Office Memorandum Reg Setting Up Of Committee To Study Filing Of Appeals By Dept (66.4 KiB, 1,712 hits)
My experience is that the appellate orders are mostly not attended in time, not understood by the present AO as the original order was passed by someone else, no effort is made to understand the facts and the legal implications by the present officer, at the last moment of the time limitation of filing the appeal to be on the safe side merely on the consideration of the tax effect, appeals are filed. Appellate orders are not a priority of the AOs and there is lack of administrative control of the Range officers and even the CsIT. The remedy is to impose strict penalty on all concerned.Let the officers be made to understand by example that mere filing further appeals is not the safest way.Report of the committee is not important. The ills are well known. The need of the hour is to take strict measures and measures are known to officers and also the tax practitioners
The biggest harassment to taxpayer is enforcement of 100% tax after the CIT(A) order. Are the orders of CIT(A) so legally correct to enforce large demands? Aren’t they also act on fears and favour? Let there be a provision to pay higher interest if the same is not paid after CIT(A) or ITAT’s order but should be allowed to keep in abeyance up to ITAT’s order.
A committee will appear to be a waste. The 16th Tax Reforms Committee has correctly understood regarding the intra-executive inhibitions for taking bold and justifiable decisions on all matters including assessment and appeals. ” Let-the independent appellate and judicial authorities take the decision”; is the attitude at all the levels of decision-making machinery. All are apprehensive of the blunt-sword of vigilance department.
Remedy lies in making the Vigilance proceedings applicable to even incorrect/callous pro-revenue actions.