{"id":7938,"date":"2016-09-08T13:54:23","date_gmt":"2016-09-08T08:24:23","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.itatonline.org\/info\/?p=7938"},"modified":"2016-09-08T13:54:23","modified_gmt":"2016-09-08T08:24:23","slug":"cbdt-reacts-to-high-court-strictures-and-revises-guidelines-for-appointment-of-and-fees-payable-to-standing-counsel","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/info\/cbdt-reacts-to-high-court-strictures-and-revises-guidelines-for-appointment-of-and-fees-payable-to-standing-counsel\/","title":{"rendered":"CBDT Reacts To High Court Strictures And Revises Guidelines For Appointment Of, And Fees Payable To, Standing Counsel"},"content":{"rendered":"

The CBDT has issued Instruction Nos.6 and 7 of 2016, both dated 7th September 2016, by which it has revised the guidelines for engagement of standing counsels to represent the income-tax department before the High Courts and other judicial forums. The CBDT has also revised the schedule of fees payable to the Counsel. <\/p>\n

Prima facie, the CBDT appears to have borne in mind the strictures passed and directions issued by the Bombay High Court in CIT vs. TCL Holdings<\/a>. The Court commented adversely on the “casual and careless representation<\/em>” by the Standing Counsel even in cases having huge revenue implications. <\/p>\n

Click here to download Instructions No. 6<\/a> and Instruction No. 7<\/a> dated 7th September 2016<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The CBDT has issued Instruction Nos.6 and 7 of 2016, both dated 7th September 2016, by which it has revised the guidelines for engagement of standing counsels to represent the income-tax department before the High Courts and other judicial forums. The CBDT has also revised the schedule of fees payable to the Counsel<\/p>\n

Read more ›<\/a><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_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":""},"categories":[1,6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7938","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-all-information","category-supreme-courthigh-court-related"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/info\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7938","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/info\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/info\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/info\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/info\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7938"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/info\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7938\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/info\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7938"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/info\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7938"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/info\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7938"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}